or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by diddy

I remember people blubbering about that it was superior solely because it was free and open and h.264 was not and that even though hardware vendors never optimized for WebM that they all would and that Apple would suffer if they didn't add support immediately. Yea. Lesson one - just because Google says it's good because it is not an industry standard and not used anywhere and it's free and open doesn't mean anything.
Which, Ironically, was done as a response to Chrome.
If that was the rule rather than the exception, we would be seeing stuff like this happening daily. Note that after this happened, Apple responded and changed procedures. That's what you do when you have disasters. Clearly they tried to prepare for an inspection improperly and they created an accident instead. Not to mention that they were dealing with a substance that is already dangerous to handle.ETA: Honestly for a corporation it is much cheaper to make sure that...
Summary judgments are pretty hard to actually come by in civil suits like this - court cases tend to drag on even if it’s obvious that somebody is going to loose. Take the Psystar case. Dragged on forever before Apple was granted a summary judgment and it was extremely obvious that Psystar was in the wrong and Apple had tons of evidence. And Psystar was not a big company. Summary judgments are a big thing and it is less likely to occur in this case. And I doubt that...
Because that’s not how the world works.
That is important - no charges whatsoever have been filed at all. The DOJ might think something is going on, but that's no different than the cops following a car that they suspect is stolen or is involved in illegal activities. That an investigation is going on does not mean that anyone is guilty. Heck, nobody can say that a crime has occurred. This could be nothing more than the DOJ saying "we are keeping an eye you here..."
I’m taking this with as much salt as any other random tech pundant. Think about it - if Samsung knew something (as a component maker), they would be under NDA and their legal team (busy with lawsuits) isn’t going to want the headache of dealing with a blatant violation possibly affecting other IP suits. No, this is nothing more than a “Apple has to do X” or “Apple should do X” or “Apple will do X to compete with Y”. We know how Apple appreciates outside advice on how to...
I think your post was grammatically correct and you probably have a better grasp of what censorship actually is and can distinctly the types are and doesn’t just toss it out there as if any form of it whatsoever puts you suddenly in the league of Satan!
It's also pretty much the way that every retailer works - to some degree they restrict what is allowed to be sold. It doesn't matter if the thing being sold is some sort of creative expression.
But he doesn't have to do that in order to distribute his free speech in general. Apple is jsut telling him what would be allowed. Godin isn't being told to do that by anybody. If he ends up making that decision, it would be him. That's how agreements between two parties work. If Godin wanted to maintain his work intact, he can find someone who will let him do that. He can even sell it by his lonesome self if it came to it. Let me make this 100% clear NOBODY IS...
New Posts  All Forums: