If Valve goes bust it won't be their decision, it'd be up to the receivers or liquidators. It wouldn't happen, and some gigantic empire like EA would purchase those assets to block it. Additionally, a fair whack of games on Steam were not produced by Valve, so removing the copyright protection from them would be a breach of contract and copyright infringement, opening them up to severe criminal penalties.
This "they'll de-drm everything" is the biggest have in history.
They're objecting to applications for generic terms where the applicant has stated that they will not make it available to their competition. For example, all Amazon's applications contain explicit verbiage saying that no one but Amazon will be allowed to register domains in them - and we're talking strings like ".baby", "kids" and ".book"
Skype issues invoices from Skype Software SarL (Luxembourg - surprise!) if I'm not mistaken. Google issues invoices from Google Ireland. Anecdote of the day - my web host, Softlayer Technologies, just recently changed to issuing invoices via a Dutch holding company for everyone outside the US - a great way to save on taxes.
Noone is claiming that. You really need to RTFC (read the fine comment). The number is $1B revenue including GST, of which Google has paid less than $100K in taxes.
Then go move to Somalia, where the government doesn't tax you and they offer you no essential services. The first time a warlord steals all your possessions and rapes your family I'm sure you'll be crying for government intervention.
Asserting that you owe nothing to the society that sets and enforces the laws that keep you safe, puts out the fire that threatens your life and possessions, and pays for you to survive when your employer slashes their workforce in half is patent bullshit of the highest calibre.
Corporate taxes are not based on revenue. They are usually based on the difference between revenue and cost. It would be hell to live in a world where we had to obey the 'intention' of the law rather than the law itself.
You just described New Zealand's tax law. When the IRD (Inland Revenue Department) presses charges against someone for tax evasion, they often use parliamentary intent to justify why an action which is actually technically legal is illegal. The tax department essentially goes into court, says "clearly, this is what parliament intended when drafting this law", then upon winning the case set the investigators scouring the country looking for others who did the same thing.
And they often retroactively apply these "bulletins" over periods considerably greater than the record-keeping requirement so you have no defence.
The RIAA has definitely lost money on piracy. They earn money from "selling CD licenses". The more people that are pirating the less CDs are being bought, and that's not all they have lost, in addition mindshare and brand power. This is especially harmful considering threatening new independent revenue models popping up.
Hmm. Suddenly, the argument with a mere few words replaced is the sort of thing that gets you a troll mod on this site. How is it that when the RIAA claims that "lost sales" due to piracy costs them money everyone attacks with a righteous fury but when Mozilla "loses money" due to "lost downloads" due to browser ballot glitches, suddenly it's a valid argument?
I'm not saying it didn't result in them not getting downloads they otherwise would have. I'm saying that assuming how many downloads were lost and trumpeting it from the rooftops is just as dishonest as what the RIAA and MPAA do, and Mozilla should be ashamed.
Two of the three app stores are owned by entities headquartered in California. Only Microsoft's app store would be able to legally ignore it if they decided to go that approach.
No. Stop. Right there. It's exactly the same as the record companies claiming that every person who pirated a CD would have bought it anyway. The fact that this is about Microsoft and Mozilla is irrelevant. The claim that the glitch "costed" 6.9 million downloads is fatally flawed and disingenuous.
This is completely incidental to what type of issue this is.
Your state office would in that case go offline roughly 90 minutes after virtually every disaster possible. Natural Gas, being a utility, is virtually guaranteed to be taken offline in cases where power goes out, ESPECIALLY when the power is deliberately cut off by the provider as a preventative against cataclysmic explosions where a gas pipeline explosion would be even worse.
Wall Street. It's a big deal for them to be literally right next to their data centres, as to them it is critically important that their trade order makes it over the wire in 0.001 seconds, rather than 0.006 seconds.
No, it's because below ground is the only legal place to put it, and the only safe place where the fuel source igniting in a disaster won't blow up the upper floors and fling shrapnel for 100 feet in every direction.
No, because it's not centralised. Some carriers share them overseas (with Vodafone, they likely share it with other Vodafone Group members and they then share them with other local carriers) but not all. And I imagine most cellphone carriers would be quite resistant to putting that much power in the hands of a third party too.
Slashdot Mirror
At which point they're sued for copyright infringement by all the companies who publish games on Steam. Good plan.
If Valve goes bust it won't be their decision, it'd be up to the receivers or liquidators. It wouldn't happen, and some gigantic empire like EA would purchase those assets to block it. Additionally, a fair whack of games on Steam were not produced by Valve, so removing the copyright protection from them would be a breach of contract and copyright infringement, opening them up to severe criminal penalties.
This "they'll de-drm everything" is the biggest have in history.
They're objecting to applications for generic terms where the applicant has stated that they will not make it available to their competition. For example, all Amazon's applications contain explicit verbiage saying that no one but Amazon will be allowed to register domains in them - and we're talking strings like ".baby", "kids" and ".book"
Skype issues invoices from Skype Software SarL (Luxembourg - surprise!) if I'm not mistaken. Google issues invoices from Google Ireland. Anecdote of the day - my web host, Softlayer Technologies, just recently changed to issuing invoices via a Dutch holding company for everyone outside the US - a great way to save on taxes.
I think there's a loose patch on your tinfoil hat.
Noone is claiming that. You really need to RTFC (read the fine comment). The number is $1B revenue including GST, of which Google has paid less than $100K in taxes.
You keep saying this, but you provide absolutely no justification of the statement.
Not surprising, because the statement is bullshit.
No, mod GP down tinfoil hat insane. The assertion that everything a government does is immoral is patent bullshit.
Then go move to Somalia, where the government doesn't tax you and they offer you no essential services. The first time a warlord steals all your possessions and rapes your family I'm sure you'll be crying for government intervention.
Asserting that you owe nothing to the society that sets and enforces the laws that keep you safe, puts out the fire that threatens your life and possessions, and pays for you to survive when your employer slashes their workforce in half is patent bullshit of the highest calibre.
Corporate taxes are not based on revenue. They are usually based on the difference between revenue and cost. It would be hell to live in a world where we had to obey the 'intention' of the law rather than the law itself.
You just described New Zealand's tax law. When the IRD (Inland Revenue Department) presses charges against someone for tax evasion, they often use parliamentary intent to justify why an action which is actually technically legal is illegal. The tax department essentially goes into court, says "clearly, this is what parliament intended when drafting this law", then upon winning the case set the investigators scouring the country looking for others who did the same thing.
And they often retroactively apply these "bulletins" over periods considerably greater than the record-keeping requirement so you have no defence.
MegaUpload was a Hong Kong company, and the US managed to get their assets seized by the HK government. So no, not at all.
The RIAA has definitely lost money on piracy. They earn money from "selling CD licenses". The more people that are pirating the less CDs are being bought, and that's not all they have lost, in addition mindshare and brand power. This is especially harmful considering threatening new independent revenue models popping up.
Hmm. Suddenly, the argument with a mere few words replaced is the sort of thing that gets you a troll mod on this site. How is it that when the RIAA claims that "lost sales" due to piracy costs them money everyone attacks with a righteous fury but when Mozilla "loses money" due to "lost downloads" due to browser ballot glitches, suddenly it's a valid argument?
Double standard much?
Based on the empirical evidence of our own retailers, they sell less product and eventually stop trying.
I'm not saying it didn't result in them not getting downloads they otherwise would have. I'm saying that assuming how many downloads were lost and trumpeting it from the rooftops is just as dishonest as what the RIAA and MPAA do, and Mozilla should be ashamed.
Two of the three app stores are owned by entities headquartered in California. Only Microsoft's app store would be able to legally ignore it if they decided to go that approach.
You must be a hoot at parties.
For your assertion to be correct, your post would have to be truth. However, it's not so your reply is irrelevant.
That said, the GGP doesn't really back up the veracity of their own statement.
So what you're saying is that OS X and Linux are not viable competitors to Windows?
Oh, Windows isn't a monopoly. Gotcha.
So what's this all about again?
No. Stop. Right there. It's exactly the same as the record companies claiming that every person who pirated a CD would have bought it anyway. The fact that this is about Microsoft and Mozilla is irrelevant. The claim that the glitch "costed" 6.9 million downloads is fatally flawed and disingenuous.
This is completely incidental to what type of issue this is.
Your state office would in that case go offline roughly 90 minutes after virtually every disaster possible. Natural Gas, being a utility, is virtually guaranteed to be taken offline in cases where power goes out, ESPECIALLY when the power is deliberately cut off by the provider as a preventative against cataclysmic explosions where a gas pipeline explosion would be even worse.
You do realise you just said that Earthquake Risk is ALWAYS zero right?
This is why double negatives are bad.
Wall Street. It's a big deal for them to be literally right next to their data centres, as to them it is critically important that their trade order makes it over the wire in 0.001 seconds, rather than 0.006 seconds.
No, it's because below ground is the only legal place to put it, and the only safe place where the fuel source igniting in a disaster won't blow up the upper floors and fling shrapnel for 100 feet in every direction.
No, because it's not centralised. Some carriers share them overseas (with Vodafone, they likely share it with other Vodafone Group members and they then share them with other local carriers) but not all. And I imagine most cellphone carriers would be quite resistant to putting that much power in the hands of a third party too.
Except 2degrees, who because of their American owner insist they don't need an IMEI blacklist because "stolen phones aren't a problem".