I clicked on this headline expecting to read about a 9.5 or something of that magnitude, but it turns out 'largest ever recorded quake' means 'largest ever recorded in that region'
TFA only goes back to 1998. The history of DRM goes back much, much further than that, the only difference being that it was called "copy protection" rather than DRM
The author of the article knew the difference between DRM and Copy Protection. Given the context of the article being about content no longer playing, wanting a history of copy protection in this article is like asking for an article about unpopular cars to include a history of the horse-drawn carriage.
It's a couple of hours later and I'm reading this now and wondering why I was being such an ass to you. I'm not gonna insult you by trying to cook up some excuse for it, it was just uncalled for. I'm sorry and I hope you have a good weekend.
Well... not until you responded. It's obvious you have no interest in understanding the topic you, strangely enough, have an opinion on. For starters, you'd need a basic education on trademarks (with a little starter course on patents...) Then you'd need to brush up on your reading comprehension. And, finally, you'd need to be open minded enough to actually have a discussion and not a debate.
Since I'm not interested in being your teacher, you're only doing me a favor by bailing. All that fuss and I didn't even say Apple was in the right.
Alright folks, listen up: This is not an appropriate time for a shark joke. This is very clearly an opportunity for an Alan Parsens or Preperation H reference.
Anybody caught making a Frickin' Sharks joke will be permanently labeled a virgin.
...but since the fix was to use a cover which many people did anyway (explaining the low complaint/return rate) it appears they didn't look deep enough, as proven by the fact that they did eventually find the issue.
You know, I'd *almost* be with you here but Consumer Reports themselves said the phone was great once a bumper was added. I also think the bumper wasn't the entire reason for the low return rate. I didn't have one for three weeks and only encountered that problem once and that was in a room that had a poor signal to begin with. I'll concede that that is purely speculative and anecdotal.
I think I should have put a little more time into that reply...
I said before that I didn't see it as pure arrogance, what I meant by that was virtually all cell phones can be held incorrectly. I personally haven't owned one yet that didn't have a kill-spot and my Palm Treo, in particular, was prone to this just by holding it normally. No torches and pitchforks from the media over that one. I think it was dumb of Steve Jobs to say what he did, but I also understand that, combined with such low numbers of people reporting it, would make the claim dubious at best. This is, of course, with the media sensationalizing it. I mean, nobody's returning their phones, but 'AntennaGate'?
So why assume a product flaw first? I agree about investigating it, but if nothing's turning up....
The antenna problems with the iPhone 4 were obfuscated and blamed on the user at first, too.
If you released a product that sold into the millions and then the media started running with a story about how it was broken, but you were only getting complaints numbering in the thousands, where is the first place you'd think the problem would lay?
Third, as is pointed out every time an incident like this occurs, trademark owners have to take no chances and must enforce perceived violations or risk losing their right to it.
You are right about this, but surely they'd be exempt from this just on the grounds that this a restaurant.
This is what happens when overpaid patent lawyers sit around and have nothing to do. They're acting busy by going out and sending out C&D orders to random people.
Dumb comments like these are exactly why people shouldn't assume that they're educated on a topic just because they read Slashdot headlines.
I mean, NOBODY is going to confuse them for the Apple Store. This is just petty.
I'm only going by American trademark law here, but, no, this has nothing to do with people confusing them with the Apple Store. They have to pursue these matters to maintain their trademark.
That said, where you could nail Apple on this is that the store only sells food. The only reason I can imagine that Apple'd even try this is if they intend to sell food at their stores... which actually was a rumor that popped up recently.
In short, I agree that it's petty, just nitpicking the details a little.
Slashdot Mirror
I clicked on this headline expecting to read about a 9.5 or something of that magnitude, but it turns out 'largest ever recorded quake' means 'largest ever recorded in that region'
Not working due to media failure != not working due to lack of permission. Note the use of the term 'rights' and not 'copies'.
Quite percussive.
TFA only goes back to 1998. The history of DRM goes back much, much further than that, the only difference being that it was called "copy protection" rather than DRM
The author of the article knew the difference between DRM and Copy Protection. Given the context of the article being about content no longer playing, wanting a history of copy protection in this article is like asking for an article about unpopular cars to include a history of the horse-drawn carriage.
Umm, yeah, so we also have no excuse for kitting our asses kicked in an alien invasion, right?
Find me a laptop that has a big enough screen where that actually matters, at all?
Actually, on a 17" laptop, it does matter, completely. So, let's see the answer to that question.
Umm can we get slower but unlimited data back, please? I don't need tens of megabits to download email.
This stupid-ass nickel and diming is why banks are having to kiss the asses of half a million people.
Do you open your gifts at night, or in the morning when your mom comes downstairs with cake?
In the vast majority of cases, including this one, the difference between 'possible' and 'plausible' is simply putting a little brain power into it.
It's a couple of hours later and I'm reading this now and wondering why I was being such an ass to you. I'm not gonna insult you by trying to cook up some excuse for it, it was just uncalled for. I'm sorry and I hope you have a good weekend.
Oh, well, you're right. There's just no way 650,000 people couldn't send a statement to the cellular companies in the United States.
Damn.
I gotta say, I'm impressed. I just hope they all go after the cell phone companies next.
You answered your own question there.
Well... not until you responded. It's obvious you have no interest in understanding the topic you, strangely enough, have an opinion on. For starters, you'd need a basic education on trademarks (with a little starter course on patents...) Then you'd need to brush up on your reading comprehension. And, finally, you'd need to be open minded enough to actually have a discussion and not a debate.
Since I'm not interested in being your teacher, you're only doing me a favor by bailing. All that fuss and I didn't even say Apple was in the right.
It couldn't be someone who has an axe to grind on Android phones, no?
Gee, why would a polarizing story like that make it to Slashdot? Hmmmmmmmmm
If you're confused about whether or not the GP is correct, how is my explaining it going to do either of us any good?
Alright folks, listen up: This is not an appropriate time for a shark joke. This is very clearly an opportunity for an Alan Parsens or Preperation H reference.
Anybody caught making a Frickin' Sharks joke will be permanently labeled a virgin.
...but since the fix was to use a cover which many people did anyway (explaining the low complaint/return rate) it appears they didn't look deep enough, as proven by the fact that they did eventually find the issue.
You know, I'd *almost* be with you here but Consumer Reports themselves said the phone was great once a bumper was added. I also think the bumper wasn't the entire reason for the low return rate. I didn't have one for three weeks and only encountered that problem once and that was in a room that had a poor signal to begin with. I'll concede that that is purely speculative and anecdotal.
I think I should have put a little more time into that reply...
I said before that I didn't see it as pure arrogance, what I meant by that was virtually all cell phones can be held incorrectly. I personally haven't owned one yet that didn't have a kill-spot and my Palm Treo, in particular, was prone to this just by holding it normally. No torches and pitchforks from the media over that one. I think it was dumb of Steve Jobs to say what he did, but I also understand that, combined with such low numbers of people reporting it, would make the claim dubious at best. This is, of course, with the media sensationalizing it. I mean, nobody's returning their phones, but 'AntennaGate'?
So why assume a product flaw first? I agree about investigating it, but if nothing's turning up....
purely you can't argue that the 'you're holding it wrong' response wasn't pure arrogance...
I dunno about 'pure arrogance', but yeah that was condescending of him to say. However...
If MS responded to a complaint about Windows with something like that just because they've sold 400,000,000 copies would you say that's ok?
If less than a percent of the people reported that problem would you first assume it was a flaw or that the users were doing something wrong?
Well it'd certainly be nice to have an intelligent conversation about that, wouldn't it?
The antenna problems with the iPhone 4 were obfuscated and blamed on the user at first, too.
If you released a product that sold into the millions and then the media started running with a story about how it was broken, but you were only getting complaints numbering in the thousands, where is the first place you'd think the problem would lay?
Third, as is pointed out every time an incident like this occurs, trademark owners have to take no chances and must enforce perceived violations or risk losing their right to it.
You are right about this, but surely they'd be exempt from this just on the grounds that this a restaurant.
This is what happens when overpaid patent lawyers sit around and have nothing to do. They're acting busy by going out and sending out C&D orders to random people.
Dumb comments like these are exactly why people shouldn't assume that they're educated on a topic just because they read Slashdot headlines.
I mean, NOBODY is going to confuse them for the Apple Store. This is just petty.
I'm only going by American trademark law here, but, no, this has nothing to do with people confusing them with the Apple Store. They have to pursue these matters to maintain their trademark.
That said, where you could nail Apple on this is that the store only sells food. The only reason I can imagine that Apple'd even try this is if they intend to sell food at their stores... which actually was a rumor that popped up recently.
In short, I agree that it's petty, just nitpicking the details a little.
Appreciated. :)
Thanks man. Learn something new every day. :)