My reply to @Buzdots was aimed at his apparently misogynist "bitch slap" attitudes.
Whatever the NSA knows, we really need more civility on these forums - critical comments and responses. Not just some "sad wanker, twelve-year old views".
Hey Mike, Real name, pseudonym, avatar, picture of your dog - doesn't matter - much of what we do on this forum is recorded & stored by someone.
All I'm asking is that, "as we all go down in history" (in the NSA/ Internet ISP archives) let us do so with some grace and class - addressing the issues in a measured manner rather than going off-thread at the slightest chance.
I know you don't do this often, but your "pimp slapped" comment doesn't actually raise the level of the conversation does it?.
Actually slander is "The action or crime of making a false spoken statement damaging to a person's reputation." and libel is "A published false statement that is damaging to a person's reputation; a written defamation." Nothing in his statement could be considered either of those, so his first amendment rights are very much in force. And while yes, the NSA has their hands in everything, I refuse to be crippled by fear.
That is why I post with my actual name, not a pseudonym.
Yes, I specifically included slander because of the increased use of online videos, so the comment could be interpreted as general information. Many younger people have no idea the kind of legal hot water they could get into by making incendiary comments online.
Yes, I specifically included slander because of the increased use of online videos, so the comment could be interpreted as general information. Many younger people have no idea the kind of legal hot water they could get into by making incendiary comments online.
Pssst. Steve. Samsung makes the cheap plastic shells for their phones...
Hey a Galaxy S4 costs RRP $A849 in Australia, I think that's what he was alluding to, the initial rush of S-sheep who bought the ones shipped at that price when lacklustre sales will see pricing drop as fast as Samsung's share price.
What the frick? The title for the story can be taken either way. Either the tide has changed against Apple or for them. I would tend to think that since the Judge didn't say specifically what had changed re: the issues, for either side, and what she commented previously it would more liekly be that Apple had provided evidentiary info that has perhaps changed her mind.
The present:-
eBooks cost less,
consumers have more choice,
the market is more open and free.
Those "issues".
The DoJ are a bunch of hypocritical puppets of the dominant player who went whining to them with this "complaint".
Maybe the Judge isn't such a moron after all, she's got a bit of egg on her face due to the guilty pronouncement before the trial, nothing an appeal to the Supreme Court won't fix.
Quite true. Just because you think you are protected by your seeming anonymity on the web, does not make it true. In fact, you are still accountable for slander and libel and could be sued quite easily. Freedom of speech does not protect you from scurrilous statements. Remember, the NSA knows everything about you online.
Do you think if they extradite someone like me from Australia, over libellous comments, they could arrange a court near Disneyland, either that or Vegas?
Do you think if they extradite someone like me from Australia, over libellous comments, they could arrange a court near Disneyland, either that or Vegas?
Sorry, it's the eastern district of Texas for you foreigners, if you're lucky, otherwise, Gitmo.
Your friends will shake their heads and say, "hill60 always was an unlucky wight."
The DoJ are a bunch of hypocritical puppets of the dominant player who went whining to them with this "complaint".
Maybe the Judge isn't such a moron after all, she's got a bit of egg on her face due to the guilty pronouncement before the trial, nothing an appeal to the Supreme Court won't fix.
Actually, "the issues have shifted" is likely a response to the bomb that B&N dropped on the DOJ's case:
I honestly laughed out loud when I read this! I think that the lawyer for Apple's defense team should have the right to slap each one of the prosecutor's in the face, followed up finally with the judge being "Pimp Slapped" for her pre-trial arguments.
Yeah, not very professional or realistic…. But damn funny if you think about it.
It's only funny if you're 14 years old. Actually, not so much even then.
Don't get your hopes up. The judge will rule against Apple, that's a done deal. Remember, there are a number of state's Attorneys General waiting to pounce on Apple with lawsuits, as well as the class actions being brought. Apple needs to be guilty for this to happen and the lawyers to collect their fees. Money talks and bullshit walks.
Comments
Thanks Spam.
My reply to @Buzdots was aimed at his apparently misogynist "bitch slap" attitudes.
Whatever the NSA knows, we really need more civility on these forums - critical comments and responses. Not just some "sad wanker, twelve-year old views".
;-(
He's just talking about Cote.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zombie Steve
Well, I am honored.
I thought this video was very funny and spot on in its mockery of the iSheep. I guess Crapple's pretentious ads are more up your's (alley, that is).
Clearly they must be up your bum as you keep whining for some Preparation H.
Hey Mike, Real name, pseudonym, avatar, picture of your dog - doesn't matter - much of what we do on this forum is recorded & stored by someone.
All I'm asking is that, "as we all go down in history" (in the NSA/ Internet ISP archives) let us do so with some grace and class - addressing the issues in a measured manner rather than going off-thread at the slightest chance.
I know you don't do this often, but your "pimp slapped" comment doesn't actually raise the level of the conversation does it?.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Eggleston
Actually slander is "The action or crime of making a false spoken statement damaging to a person's reputation." and libel is "A published false statement that is damaging to a person's reputation; a written defamation." Nothing in his statement could be considered either of those, so his first amendment rights are very much in force. And while yes, the NSA has their hands in everything, I refuse to be crippled by fear.
That is why I post with my actual name, not a pseudonym.
Yes, I specifically included slander because of the increased use of online videos, so the comment could be interpreted as general information. Many younger people have no idea the kind of legal hot water they could get into by making incendiary comments online.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich
Yes, I specifically included slander because of the increased use of online videos, so the comment could be interpreted as general information. Many younger people have no idea the kind of legal hot water they could get into by making incendiary comments online.
Dead right again . . .
iSheep line up for iPhone 5 release
Quote:
Originally Posted by TeeJay2012
Pssst. Steve. Samsung makes the cheap plastic shells for their phones...
Hey a Galaxy S4 costs RRP $A849 in Australia, I think that's what he was alluding to, the initial rush of S-sheep who bought the ones shipped at that price when lacklustre sales will see pricing drop as fast as Samsung's share price.
There's a lot of "shipped" units to clear.
Terrible headline. Terrible article. When did the judge say this? Before or after testimony?
Terrible wording!
Quote:
Originally Posted by gmsquires
What the frick? The title for the story can be taken either way. Either the tide has changed against Apple or for them. I would tend to think that since the Judge didn't say specifically what had changed re: the issues, for either side, and what she commented previously it would more liekly be that Apple had provided evidentiary info that has perhaps changed her mind.
The present:-
eBooks cost less,
consumers have more choice,
the market is more open and free.
Those "issues".
The DoJ are a bunch of hypocritical puppets of the dominant player who went whining to them with this "complaint".
Maybe the Judge isn't such a moron after all, she's got a bit of egg on her face due to the guilty pronouncement before the trial, nothing an appeal to the Supreme Court won't fix.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich
Quite true. Just because you think you are protected by your seeming anonymity on the web, does not make it true. In fact, you are still accountable for slander and libel and could be sued quite easily. Freedom of speech does not protect you from scurrilous statements. Remember, the NSA knows everything about you online.
Do you think if they extradite someone like me from Australia, over libellous comments, they could arrange a court near Disneyland, either that or Vegas?
Quote:
Originally Posted by oneof52
Terrible headline. Terrible article. When did the judge say this? Before or after testimony?
Terrible wording!
At the end of the evidence, the judge's comment is a bit confusing, to say the least.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60
Do you think if they extradite someone like me from Australia, over libellous comments, they could arrange a court near Disneyland, either that or Vegas?
Sorry, it's the eastern district of Texas for you foreigners, if you're lucky, otherwise, Gitmo.
Your friends will shake their heads and say, "hill60 always was an unlucky wight."
Actually, "the issues have shifted" is likely a response to the bomb that B&N dropped on the DOJ's case:
http://www.macobserver.com/tmo/article/bn-drops-bombshell-in-dojs-price-fixing-case-against-apple
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Eggleston
I honestly laughed out loud when I read this! I think that the lawyer for Apple's defense team should have the right to slap each one of the prosecutor's in the face, followed up finally with the judge being "Pimp Slapped" for her pre-trial arguments.
Yeah, not very professional or realistic…. But damn funny if you think about it.
It's only funny if you're 14 years old. Actually, not so much even then.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BuzDots
The old girl ought to be bitch slapped for making such a dumb-ass comment early on - no matter how the ruling turns out.
Jurisprudence at its finest!
Commenting at its worst.
Quote:
Originally Posted by oneof52
Terrible headline. Terrible article. When did the judge say this? Before or after testimony?
Terrible wording!
Maybe this will help you (I agree that AI just slapped this story together, and did a pretty bad job).
The judge in the Apple e-book antitrust case loves her iPad - Apple 2.0 -Fortune Tech
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
Actually, "the issues have shifted" is likely a response to the bomb that B&N dropped on the DOJ's case:
http://www.macobserver.com/tmo/article/bn-drops-bombshell-in-dojs-price-fixing-case-against-apple
Here are even more details of B&N's testimony:
The Apple e-book antitrust trial: Enter Barnes & Noble - Apple 2.0 -Fortune Tech
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sumergo
we really need more civility on these forums - critical comments and responses. Not just some "sad wanker, twelve-year old views".
I read this as highly hypocritical.
Don't get your hopes up. The judge will rule against Apple, that's a done deal. Remember, there are a number of state's Attorneys General waiting to pounce on Apple with lawsuits, as well as the class actions being brought. Apple needs to be guilty for this to happen and the lawyers to collect their fees. Money talks and bullshit walks.
Yes, I'm a cynic.