Ubisoft games are now on my blacklist -- and I buy lots of video games. Probably one or two a month, on average.
Too bad for them, I guess. Hope it's worth it to lose the legit customers who would buy their games, were they not saddled with such intrusive DRM.
And Dungeons & Dragons.
And Rap music.
And Booze.
And, of course, printed words.
It's pretty telling that the article shows a picture of Anderson holding up a copy of his book. There's no way he could have an incentive to be biased is there?
Both parties pull garbage like that, which I almost expect at this point.
I'm more bothered when a Senator replies to my questions around the transparency of ACTA with an explanation (in industry-friendly terms) of what ACTA is. I was already well-aware of what ACTA is, and his response led me to believe he's the one who needs an education on it.
Both parties pull garbage like that, which I almost expect at this point.
I'm more bothered when a Senator replies to my questions around the transparency of ACTA with an explanation (in industry-friendly terms) of what ACTA is. I was already well-aware of what ACTA is, and his response led me to believe he's the one who needs an education on it.
Yup. And, adding insult to injury, he added me to his spam e-mail list. Now, not only can he he respond to my questions with ill-conceived industry drivel, he can also beg me for money for his reelection campaign!
Good luck with that. I wrote to my senator (John Cornyn, should you care) a month ago regarding my concerns around ACTA and the lack of transparency in the process. His response, which read like it was written by an industry trade group, went on and on about the importance of ACTA and the importance of protecting U.S. IP, but said nothing regarding my original complaint around transparency.
A license to surf would also take care of that pesky online-anonymity thing.
We should all get paid for having to suffer through that awful song's popularity, but only after we've been reimbursed for the Crocodile Dundee movies, too.
And even worse, crazy-mean spiders!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sydney_funnel-web_spider
Ha. That's just plain snobbery.
How you make money doesn't define who you are (or if it does, I feel sorry for you). Think of all the artists we always hear of who weren't successful until after they died. Do we still refer to them as carpenters, or mechanics, or whatever they did to make ends meet? No.
Ha. That's just plain snobbery.
How you make money doesn't define who you are (or if it does, I feel sorry for you). Think of all the artists we always hear of who weren't successful until after they died. Do we still refer to them as carpenters, or mechanics, or whatever they did to make ends meet? No.
"All of music" hasn't been about "making music" for a long time. It's been about making money.
And being in business is about begging for cash. That's what businesses do. They beg people to trade them money for goods or services.
The only thing changing in music is how the money's made, and who will be making it.
Yes, they must feel awful for breaking the spirit of absurd trademark regulations.
This is why we need the government to protect the mainstream press. So they can take reports like this and not do a lick of research before parroting the findings.
Glad someone else made this point. Not commenting on the broader case, but they are headquartered in Texas, so it makes sense that they'd file the case here.
Re:
I'll offset your hate by stating my love for that commercial. The comedic timing. The punch line.
All greatness.