It may also be worth noting that the publishers wanted the judge to consider only the primary text of the book (not including prefaces, introductory chapters, footnotes, tables, appendices, etc.) when factoring what percentage of a work was used. The judge instead ruled that the entire work counted when factoring percentages. It would not be surprising to see the publishers challenge this.
I wanted to let everyone know that we value our customers’ privacy and security and have never sold any personally identifiable information to any third party.
Do you have a clearly stated and firm policy regarding the release of customers' information to "authority" figures?
I am currently driving a 97 Chevy. Before that it was an 89 Oldsmobile, and before that another Chevy. By the end of next year I plan to be in a new car. It will not be anything (read: GM) with this crap attached to it. Congratulations for chasing away a life-long customer during the worst recession in two generations (and I am likely not alone). The amount of undiluted stupid oozing out of this marketing scheme is incredible.
I mean, seriously, this is your plan to sell cars? Spy on your customers and sell the details of their private lives? I hope you get good money for the info you collect, because you're already in the hole for at least $25,000 or $30,000 because I am no longer planning to buy one of these.
Letting people die around the world is not good for the economy.
Actually, fewer living people means lower unemployment, less drain on resources, and a greater abundance of food. Fewer workers means higher wages for labor and thus an improved standard of living, as well as an increase in tax revenue. This leads to a sharp decrease in the prosperity gap between rich and poor nations, ultimately resulting in the return of working-class jobs to the good old USA. It's really a win/win for everyone. Unless, of course, you have a soul or a conscience, or whatever. Which, fortunately, no one does.
Honestly, for the price of a mediocre steak sandwich and a pint of beer you can get both sides of Netflix. If it's true that they're adding games, it's still the best entertainment value I have access to (short of a library card), even if it does cost twice as much as last year. You can barely play a computer game for less than $15 a month anymore. My wife and I watch a lot of movies, and if the Better-Half wasn't addicted to the Vampire Bill Show, we would probably cancel cable before Netflix.
I understand being upset at the price hike, as well as the way it was handled, but the level of anger seems disproportionate to the level of insult. Especially because it's not entirely Netfix's fault. If my Netflix subscription keeps me and the wife away from the movie theater or the bar even just once a month, it has more than paid for itself. I'm not trying to sound like a fanboy, it's just that based on the way the internet's collective head has exploded over this, I feel like Netflix deserves at least a little bit of understanding. It bottles the mind that someone would complain about Netflix "abusing" their customers, and then say they're going back to Blockbuster.
Also, I'm not sure I understand all of the plastic disc hating going on. Streaming is great, sure, but if you have even a halfway decent home theater setup, then you know that the quality you can get from a disc is far superior to even the rare "HD" stream from Netflix. The disc selection is superior to the streaming options and the quality of playback, particularly for blu-ray, is superior as well (at least in my experience). I always considered the streaming to be a good bonus, but not a substitute, even if it is responsible for me sometimes sitting on a single disc for a month.
To be fair to the school, The Higher Education Opportunity Act of 2008 (I think that's the one) contains provisions that require campuses to police their networks for piracy or risk losing funding (read: federal scholarship money). The language of the law is a bit vague, so schools are free to go about it in whatever way they deem appropriate enough to be considered a good faith effort. A lot of schools don't really do much it seems, but UNC may just be trying to comply with a bad law, especially if they have been in hot water with the internet cops before.
"One hopes that Markson can find himself a good (pro bono?) lawyer who can explain to Summit and the court that this is not how trademark law works."
Summit has heaps of money. Markson does not. Summit gets what it wants. Markson can GDIAF. I was under the impression that this is exactly how trademark law works. What have I missed?
As someone who pretty much just plays Battlefield and Portal, I find it amusing that the only reason I even know Driver:SF exists is because of the constant barrage of negative publicity. I'm almost tempted to buy just to see for myself what the fuss is about. almost. Perhaps I should just download it like I would a car.
Except for the fact that all the Idiot Cop has to do is claim that "what you can't hear on the tape is me being threatened, and maybe even the sounds of gunfire." The Idiot Cop's own recording of the incident will have been "unfortunately lost" or "damaged in the scuffle," so we'll just have to take his word for it.
Breaking News: The government has just declared that it is logically impossible for those who create, buy, or enforce the law to break the law. One well respected judge was quoted as saying "I AM THE LAW!"
This Just In: The price of bullets has risen ten-fold overnight with many retailers reporting shortages.
So, now that high school sporting events are no longer "public," I assume that while in attendance I am now free to carry a firearm, and/or consume massive quantities of alcohol while getting a lap dance from a stripper. The half-time show is gonna kick so much ass this year...
I have been a loyal consumer of the battlefield franchise since BF:1942, all the expansion packs, DLC, and everything else. I even steam-gifted multiple copies BF:BC2 to some friends so they would play that POS with me. I have been looking forward to BF3 ever since I first launched the demo for 2142. But I guess I still just can't be trusted...
I have been stashing cash all summer to buy a new video card when BF3 is released. Looks like this bit of news has just saved me not only $60 bucks for the game, but another $300 or so on top of that for new gear. Perhaps instead of complaining to EA, there should be some "constructive criticism" directed towards nVidia, ATI, AMD, Intel, etc. When I don't buy new games, I don't buy new gaming gear. After all, out in the back yard on a nice autumn day with a good book and a cold brew is certainly NOT "the way it is meant to be played."
also worth mentioning
It may also be worth noting that the publishers wanted the judge to consider only the primary text of the book (not including prefaces, introductory chapters, footnotes, tables, appendices, etc.) when factoring what percentage of a work was used. The judge instead ruled that the entire work counted when factoring percentages. It would not be surprising to see the publishers challenge this.
Re: Clarification
Also: have never and will never are two entirely different sentiments.
Re: Clarification
I wanted to let everyone know that we value our customers’ privacy and security and have never sold any personally identifiable information to any third party.
Do you have a clearly stated and firm policy regarding the release of customers' information to "authority" figures?
rotten timing
I am currently driving a 97 Chevy. Before that it was an 89 Oldsmobile, and before that another Chevy. By the end of next year I plan to be in a new car. It will not be anything (read: GM) with this crap attached to it. Congratulations for chasing away a life-long customer during the worst recession in two generations (and I am likely not alone). The amount of undiluted stupid oozing out of this marketing scheme is incredible.
I mean, seriously, this is your plan to sell cars? Spy on your customers and sell the details of their private lives? I hope you get good money for the info you collect, because you're already in the hole for at least $25,000 or $30,000 because I am no longer planning to buy one of these.
(untitled comment)
Letting people die around the world is not good for the economy.
Actually, fewer living people means lower unemployment, less drain on resources, and a greater abundance of food. Fewer workers means higher wages for labor and thus an improved standard of living, as well as an increase in tax revenue. This leads to a sharp decrease in the prosperity gap between rich and poor nations, ultimately resulting in the return of working-class jobs to the good old USA. It's really a win/win for everyone. Unless, of course, you have a soul or a conscience, or whatever. Which, fortunately, no one does.
It's still a pretty good deal for a lot of people
Honestly, for the price of a mediocre steak sandwich and a pint of beer you can get both sides of Netflix. If it's true that they're adding games, it's still the best entertainment value I have access to (short of a library card), even if it does cost twice as much as last year. You can barely play a computer game for less than $15 a month anymore. My wife and I watch a lot of movies, and if the Better-Half wasn't addicted to the Vampire Bill Show, we would probably cancel cable before Netflix.
I understand being upset at the price hike, as well as the way it was handled, but the level of anger seems disproportionate to the level of insult. Especially because it's not entirely Netfix's fault. If my Netflix subscription keeps me and the wife away from the movie theater or the bar even just once a month, it has more than paid for itself. I'm not trying to sound like a fanboy, it's just that based on the way the internet's collective head has exploded over this, I feel like Netflix deserves at least a little bit of understanding. It bottles the mind that someone would complain about Netflix "abusing" their customers, and then say they're going back to Blockbuster.
Also, I'm not sure I understand all of the plastic disc hating going on. Streaming is great, sure, but if you have even a halfway decent home theater setup, then you know that the quality you can get from a disc is far superior to even the rare "HD" stream from Netflix. The disc selection is superior to the streaming options and the quality of playback, particularly for blu-ray, is superior as well (at least in my experience). I always considered the streaming to be a good bonus, but not a substitute, even if it is responsible for me sometimes sitting on a single disc for a month.
HEOA
To be fair to the school, The Higher Education Opportunity Act of 2008 (I think that's the one) contains provisions that require campuses to police their networks for piracy or risk losing funding (read: federal scholarship money). The language of the law is a bit vague, so schools are free to go about it in whatever way they deem appropriate enough to be considered a good faith effort. A lot of schools don't really do much it seems, but UNC may just be trying to comply with a bad law, especially if they have been in hot water with the internet cops before.
(untitled comment)
"One hopes that Markson can find himself a good (pro bono?) lawyer who can explain to Summit and the court that this is not how trademark law works."
Summit has heaps of money. Markson does not. Summit gets what it wants. Markson can GDIAF. I was under the impression that this is exactly how trademark law works. What have I missed?
(untitled comment)
As someone who pretty much just plays Battlefield and Portal, I find it amusing that the only reason I even know Driver:SF exists is because of the constant barrage of negative publicity. I'm almost tempted to buy just to see for myself what the fuss is about. almost. Perhaps I should just download it like I would a car.
Re:
Except for the fact that all the Idiot Cop has to do is claim that "what you can't hear on the tape is me being threatened, and maybe even the sounds of gunfire." The Idiot Cop's own recording of the incident will have been "unfortunately lost" or "damaged in the scuffle," so we'll just have to take his word for it.
(untitled comment)
Sounds like a good time to dump all of my E-Verify stock.
(untitled comment)
Breaking News: The government has just declared that it is logically impossible for those who create, buy, or enforce the law to break the law. One well respected judge was quoted as saying "I AM THE LAW!"
This Just In: The price of bullets has risen ten-fold overnight with many retailers reporting shortages.
(untitled comment)
So, now that high school sporting events are no longer "public," I assume that while in attendance I am now free to carry a firearm, and/or consume massive quantities of alcohol while getting a lap dance from a stripper. The half-time show is gonna kick so much ass this year...
Thanks, EA, for making it easy.
I have been a loyal consumer of the battlefield franchise since BF:1942, all the expansion packs, DLC, and everything else. I even steam-gifted multiple copies BF:BC2 to some friends so they would play that POS with me. I have been looking forward to BF3 ever since I first launched the demo for 2142. But I guess I still just can't be trusted...
I have been stashing cash all summer to buy a new video card when BF3 is released. Looks like this bit of news has just saved me not only $60 bucks for the game, but another $300 or so on top of that for new gear. Perhaps instead of complaining to EA, there should be some "constructive criticism" directed towards nVidia, ATI, AMD, Intel, etc. When I don't buy new games, I don't buy new gaming gear. After all, out in the back yard on a nice autumn day with a good book and a cold brew is certainly NOT "the way it is meant to be played."