BTW is capitalised, it should be a comma instead of a full stop before the "when", "it's" should be capitalised and the quote should be following a colon or be in a new paragraph.
Golden rule : don't pick on other people's grammar unless yours is spotless. Liek mine is/
There are hundreds of millions of potential names for a business (and that's assuming you use existing, English words). Not only that, there are lots of exceptions for businesses operating in different areas.
It's not all that hard to come up with an original name. You come up with a creative name, see if you can trademark it, if you can't, you pick another name. It's not incredibly hard even without teams of lawyers. Google applied for a trademark, got it denied because of this existing business yet still pressed on with calling it Android.
If you operate in the same industry as another, much larger company who uses the same name out of you. It will likely drive you out of business. People will get the two brands confused and every piece of advertising that promotes their brand, devalues you. Word of mouth because worthless too as the confusion means that positive feedback will likely drive people to the more visible company.
This is a cast iron case of trademark infringement. Google are probably hoping they can settle out of court and get the name for a fairly cheap price as a result.
So unless you have full control over THEIR servers, it's DRM? Anti cheating measures? DRM! unique usernames? DRM! not allowing incompatible out of date versions on the server? DRM!
It is exactly about RMS Zealotry. When you're connecting to an eternal server, it's no longer about your software, it's now their server and their software and the user doesn't have any automatic rights to it.
DRM is about your software and your PC. Not about services provided on someone else's systems.
You could substitute 'purple monkey dishwasher' for thief. Whatever you call it, it's someone trying to argue that they should automatically have the rights of something that someone has put in a lot of time, effort and money into without any cost to them.
It's like crashing a wedding party. It doesn't usually actually cost the hosts anything but you're free-loading off of something someone else has paid for against their wishes.
You can't really say that Spore's DRM either inflated or had no effect on Piracy. It was always going to be massively torrented because of the immense hype.
Was the fear of not being able to use the online sharing driving more people to buy it than were driven away by the heavy DRM? It's incredibly hard to know.
Either way, Spore was a mediocre collection of half arsed mini games masquerading as a single revolionary piece of software. It didn't even feature evolution. Even Black and White didn't quite fail to live up to the hype as much as spore (B&W was good, it just had horrible level design, including getting rid of your creature on an early, long level)
Except that's not true (even if the act did apply in Germany):
One condition of a full warranty under that act:
"may not exclude or limit consequential damages for a breach of any written or implied warranty on the product, unless the exclusion or limitation conspicuously appears on the face of the warranty"
And in very prominent text on the standard Nintendo Hardware warranty (their caps, not mine):
"THIS WARRANTY SHALL NOT APPLY IF THIS PRODUCT: (a) IS USED WITH PRODUCTS NOT SOLD OR LICENSED BY NINTENDO (INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, NON-LICENSED GAME ENHANCEMENT AND COPIER DEVICES, ADAPTERS, AND POWER SUPPLIES); (b) IS USED FOR COMMERCIAL PURPOSES (INCLUDING RENTAL); (c) IS MODIFIED OR TAMPERED WITH; (d) IS DAMAGED BY NEGLIGENCE, ACCIDENT, UNREASONABLE USE, OR BY OTHER CAUSES UNRELATED TO DEFECTIVE MATERIALS OR WORKMANSHIP; OR (e) HAS HAD THE SERIAL NUMBER ALTERED, DEFACED OR REMOVED."
The warranty states that you cannot modify the system yourself either by opening up the console or installing custom firmware. By not following these conditions you're voiding agreed conditions. It's not illegal or immoral (gotta love the irony of accusing Nintendo of that in this case), you go against the contracted conditions, the contract is void.
If firmware has been modified they may not be able to use the utilities they have to detect faults or may not be able restore it as easily. It could take extra time and require extra effort.
It's hard enough giving support to customers when you know the software on their systems, let alone when they've got a modification which could be doing god knows what.
Humans aren't capable of long distance running 'in the wild' so to speak. In the context of Savannah marathons, we'd be dehydrated severely after a few miles. We have great cooling but it comes at a huge cost, it uses a lot of sweat up. If you run 5 miles in the blazing hot African sun without stopping to drink and there's no water at your destination, you're finished. Most mammals which don't use heavy sweating will have to stop in the shade a often to cool down when running distances but won't be as much at risk of dehydration.
We're designed for running in hot weather but not distance running.
They operate in Sweden, they hire Swedish employees and they sued through Swedish law. The decision wasn't "forced" upon them except through the Swedish legal system nor was there anything wrong with the way they sued.
If you operate a business registered in Sweden and it hires Swedish Employees, you have protection under Swedish law.
Unless you have/gain Swedish citizenship; Very little, Just as it should be.
This is a Swedish court making a judgement under Swedish law. As much as we may not like it, we don't have a right to dictate what other countries should be doing.
Except we don't have that situation at the moment. Labour only have a very slim lead, it's very hard for them to get proposals passed, not to mention the elephant in the room at Westminster is that Labour will lose the next election badly with their current level of popularity.
It's also not a form of government but a term that criticises a government with a strong majority. It's a term coined by a single person in a single paper that spread because people like being able to refer to governments as dictatorships.
The term elective dictatorship could easily be considered an oxymoron anyway. How can you argue it's a dictatorship when it consists of hundreds of democratically elected MPs who could easily be voted out in a few years time?
Wiki is the equilivant of a 'take a penny, leave a penny' jar. What they've done is the equilivant of seeing the sign saying that and emptied the cash register.
I don't think you grasp what a dictator is, nor how our electoral system works.
Our country is run by the party, not by the prime minister. The Prime Minister is just the appointed representative/head of the party. Don't like the decisions a part makes? Don't vote for them. If the party doesn't like what the prime Minister does, they do a vote of no confidence or vote against his law changes. The PM only has as much power as the party allows.
Can I break into your house to prove how insecure your locks are? I'd be willing to bet that your house or windows use a lock that can be picked in about 10 seconds.
If you're just relying on the law to protect you with your inadequate security, you're being negligent.
Windows if anything is a horribly generic descriptive name for an OS that is a WIMP environment. It's something that has given MS a lot of court headaches.
As for the rest of them, they're not exactly descriptive but generate the right feel for the program if you delve into them.
Excel - lets you excel with figures (bland and generic but still fits)
Access - Access your data
Visual studio - a studio to let you lay out your code in a visual manner.
outlook - look out and communicate with the rest of the world.
Safari - The web is an adventure!.NET - it sounds appropriately technical
various p2p - mostly evolved from bedroom coders or small internet startups, free programs that became commercial.
All of the names listed relatively appropriate and only require a modicum of thinking to link them to the function of the product. You can't say the same of stuff like Firefox where it would require incredible amounts of lateral thinking to derive that it's a browser from the name.
and yeah, GIMP is an awful name that actively harms adoption (would YOU like to bring it up in a meeting of non-techies?).
Thank you internet lawyer! I'm sure the EU will be right on the case!
They're providing very strict licensing terms for what they can and can't put XP for netbooks on. It's no different from compared Office licence costs for business to the teacher and student edition. One costs about 1/4 of the other.
Also, how on Earth can you call it predatory pricing when the competitor is free?
From what I gather, the most common cause of failure is the flash getting fried. Dodgy card readers, pulling the card out when a voltage is running through it, the chips are very sensative to spikes in current or voltage and burn out because of it.
In the UK the law grants a 'reasonable expectation of privacy'
There are established boundaries:
ok: photo of a house not ok: photo of a house that looks into the interior through the windows (tabloids would have a field day if that was legal).
ok: taking a picture of someone not ok: taking a picture of someone and then publishing it in a non-public interest fashion in a way that can identify them. For example I can take a picture of someone who's fat but I can't then use that picture in a Slim-Fast advertising campaign with the slogan "Don't be like fattie here" without their permission. Google is a commercial organisation that doesn't operate for public interest.
ok: taking pictures of someone at Tescos. not ok: taking pictures of someone at an STD clinic.
These are the three main established areas where Google street view conflicts with UK privacy laws. As the images produced are publically available for commercial reasons, there are more restrictions compared to what a private individual or CCTV system could do.
Slashdot Mirror
You forgot dofoo(needle, haystack) and foodo(haystack, needle).
PHP has an excellent central resource site. I just wish they had sorted some consistent naming so I didn't have to visit it so often for syntax...
The system operates you!
BTW is capitalised, it should be a comma instead of a full stop before the "when", "it's" should be capitalised and the quote should be following a colon or be in a new paragraph.
Golden rule : don't pick on other people's grammar unless yours is spotless. Liek mine is/
There are hundreds of millions of potential names for a business (and that's assuming you use existing, English words). Not only that, there are lots of exceptions for businesses operating in different areas.
It's not all that hard to come up with an original name. You come up with a creative name, see if you can trademark it, if you can't, you pick another name. It's not incredibly hard even without teams of lawyers. Google applied for a trademark, got it denied because of this existing business yet still pressed on with calling it Android.
If you operate in the same industry as another, much larger company who uses the same name out of you. It will likely drive you out of business. People will get the two brands confused and every piece of advertising that promotes their brand, devalues you. Word of mouth because worthless too as the confusion means that positive feedback will likely drive people to the more visible company.
This is a cast iron case of trademark infringement. Google are probably hoping they can settle out of court and get the name for a fairly cheap price as a result.
And you are prevented from buying the game then downloading the crack because...
So unless you have full control over THEIR servers, it's DRM? Anti cheating measures? DRM! unique usernames? DRM! not allowing incompatible out of date versions on the server? DRM!
It is exactly about RMS Zealotry. When you're connecting to an eternal server, it's no longer about your software, it's now their server and their software and the user doesn't have any automatic rights to it.
DRM is about your software and your PC. Not about services provided on someone else's systems.
You could substitute 'purple monkey dishwasher' for thief. Whatever you call it, it's someone trying to argue that they should automatically have the rights of something that someone has put in a lot of time, effort and money into without any cost to them.
It's like crashing a wedding party. It doesn't usually actually cost the hosts anything but you're free-loading off of something someone else has paid for against their wishes.
You can't really say that Spore's DRM either inflated or had no effect on Piracy. It was always going to be massively torrented because of the immense hype.
Was the fear of not being able to use the online sharing driving more people to buy it than were driven away by the heavy DRM? It's incredibly hard to know.
Either way, Spore was a mediocre collection of half arsed mini games masquerading as a single revolionary piece of software. It didn't even feature evolution. Even Black and White didn't quite fail to live up to the hype as much as spore (B&W was good, it just had horrible level design, including getting rid of your creature on an early, long level)
but tommorrow is today the day after today and today is tommorrow yesterday!
Except that's not true (even if the act did apply in Germany):
One condition of a full warranty under that act:
"may not exclude or limit consequential damages for a breach of any written or implied warranty on the product, unless the exclusion or limitation conspicuously appears on the face of the warranty"
And in very prominent text on the standard Nintendo Hardware warranty (their caps, not mine):
"THIS WARRANTY SHALL NOT APPLY IF THIS PRODUCT: (a) IS USED WITH PRODUCTS NOT SOLD OR LICENSED BY NINTENDO (INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, NON-LICENSED GAME ENHANCEMENT AND COPIER DEVICES, ADAPTERS, AND POWER SUPPLIES); (b) IS USED FOR COMMERCIAL PURPOSES (INCLUDING RENTAL); (c) IS MODIFIED OR TAMPERED WITH; (d) IS DAMAGED BY NEGLIGENCE, ACCIDENT, UNREASONABLE USE, OR BY OTHER CAUSES UNRELATED TO DEFECTIVE MATERIALS OR WORKMANSHIP; OR (e) HAS HAD THE SERIAL NUMBER ALTERED, DEFACED OR REMOVED."
That condition stands out clearly on the warranty ( http://www.nintendo.com/consumer/manuals/warrantytext_eng.jsp ) which itself is fairly short and easy to understand.
The warranty states that you cannot modify the system yourself either by opening up the console or installing custom firmware. By not following these conditions you're voiding agreed conditions. It's not illegal or immoral (gotta love the irony of accusing Nintendo of that in this case), you go against the contracted conditions, the contract is void.
If firmware has been modified they may not be able to use the utilities they have to detect faults or may not be able restore it as easily. It could take extra time and require extra effort.
It's hard enough giving support to customers when you know the software on their systems, let alone when they've got a modification which could be doing god knows what.
I have a lot of trouble believing this.
Humans aren't capable of long distance running 'in the wild' so to speak. In the context of Savannah marathons, we'd be dehydrated severely after a few miles. We have great cooling but it comes at a huge cost, it uses a lot of sweat up. If you run 5 miles in the blazing hot African sun without stopping to drink and there's no water at your destination, you're finished. Most mammals which don't use heavy sweating will have to stop in the shade a often to cool down when running distances but won't be as much at risk of dehydration.
We're designed for running in hot weather but not distance running.
They operate in Sweden, they hire Swedish employees and they sued through Swedish law. The decision wasn't "forced" upon them except through the Swedish legal system nor was there anything wrong with the way they sued.
If you operate a business registered in Sweden and it hires Swedish Employees, you have protection under Swedish law.
Unless you have/gain Swedish citizenship; Very little, Just as it should be.
This is a Swedish court making a judgement under Swedish law. As much as we may not like it, we don't have a right to dictate what other countries should be doing.
Which is why pleading guilty usually results in a lighter sentence.
Except we don't have that situation at the moment. Labour only have a very slim lead, it's very hard for them to get proposals passed, not to mention the elephant in the room at Westminster is that Labour will lose the next election badly with their current level of popularity.
It's also not a form of government but a term that criticises a government with a strong majority. It's a term coined by a single person in a single paper that spread because people like being able to refer to governments as dictatorships.
The term elective dictatorship could easily be considered an oxymoron anyway. How can you argue it's a dictatorship when it consists of hundreds of democratically elected MPs who could easily be voted out in a few years time?
Wiki is the equilivant of a 'take a penny, leave a penny' jar. What they've done is the equilivant of seeing the sign saying that and emptied the cash register.
so all people who don't own guns deserve to be robbed then?
Laws aren't in place to protect those who can already have means to protect themselves. It's to protect people who are unable to do so.
I don't think you grasp what a dictator is, nor how our electoral system works.
Our country is run by the party, not by the prime minister. The Prime Minister is just the appointed representative/head of the party. Don't like the decisions a part makes? Don't vote for them. If the party doesn't like what the prime Minister does, they do a vote of no confidence or vote against his law changes. The PM only has as much power as the party allows.
Can I break into your house to prove how insecure your locks are? I'd be willing to bet that your house or windows use a lock that can be picked in about 10 seconds.
If you're just relying on the law to protect you with your inadequate security, you're being negligent.
Windows if anything is a horribly generic descriptive name for an OS that is a WIMP environment. It's something that has given MS a lot of court headaches.
As for the rest of them, they're not exactly descriptive but generate the right feel for the program if you delve into them.
Excel - lets you excel with figures (bland and generic but still fits)
Access - Access your data
Visual studio - a studio to let you lay out your code in a visual manner.
outlook - look out and communicate with the rest of the world.
Safari - The web is an adventure! .NET - it sounds appropriately technical
various p2p - mostly evolved from bedroom coders or small internet startups, free programs that became commercial.
All of the names listed relatively appropriate and only require a modicum of thinking to link them to the function of the product. You can't say the same of stuff like Firefox where it would require incredible amounts of lateral thinking to derive that it's a browser from the name.
and yeah, GIMP is an awful name that actively harms adoption (would YOU like to bring it up in a meeting of non-techies?).
Thank you internet lawyer! I'm sure the EU will be right on the case!
They're providing very strict licensing terms for what they can and can't put XP for netbooks on. It's no different from compared Office licence costs for business to the teacher and student edition. One costs about 1/4 of the other.
Also, how on Earth can you call it predatory pricing when the competitor is free?
From what I gather, the most common cause of failure is the flash getting fried. Dodgy card readers, pulling the card out when a voltage is running through it, the chips are very sensative to spikes in current or voltage and burn out because of it.
Well organised? Are these the same protests of 100 people that lasted about an hour and barely got any press coverage that I saw?
In the UK the law grants a 'reasonable expectation of privacy'
There are established boundaries:
ok: photo of a house
not ok: photo of a house that looks into the interior through the windows (tabloids would have a field day if that was legal).
ok: taking a picture of someone
not ok: taking a picture of someone and then publishing it in a non-public interest fashion in a way that can identify them. For example I can take a picture of someone who's fat but I can't then use that picture in a Slim-Fast advertising campaign with the slogan "Don't be like fattie here" without their permission. Google is a commercial organisation that doesn't operate for public interest.
ok: taking pictures of someone at Tescos.
not ok: taking pictures of someone at an STD clinic.
These are the three main established areas where Google street view conflicts with UK privacy laws. As the images produced are publically available for commercial reasons, there are more restrictions compared to what a private individual or CCTV system could do.