Someone gave me a "single-use time machine" and HARDCODED it so I could either kill Hitler or Disney and nobody else?
That makes as much as the "downloading alien virus to mothership" Goldblum used in the Independence Day movie. "Jeff, we need a way to upload a virus to the mothership stat!" "Hold on, I'm writing a GUI first.
"We need you to build a time machine so we can travel back in time, change something, and affect the future (today)." "Hold on, I'm installing an A/B switch for Hitler/Disney."
I get the point you're trying to make... who is worse... Hitler or Disney. Each did horrible things and deserves to die. However, the reason time-paradox travel doesn't exist is because it can't work. Time moves inexorably forward.
Playing along.
Hypothetical one: You go back in time and kill Hitler. The V-2 is never built. The US doesn't go to the moon. SpaceX is never formed, and many other things.
Hypothetical two: You go back in time and kill Disney. Copyright isn't weaponized but lots of great "Disney classics" are never made either. So would I rather live in a world with no Mulan, Hercules, Cinderella, Beauty, Snow White, etc. but copyrights are as free as CC licenses?
I'll stick with "time travel can't exist" and if it did, instead of an A/B switch I'd have the engineer take the time (we have infinite time because we're going back in time) and change that damn switch to a selectable range of time and go back and watch the dawn of time knowing that I have great views... and killing one man won't improve the world into one Possible Perfect Future (thanks, Gene R!).
There are many ways to do a merger or acquisition. Those include stock purchase (corporation), interest purchase (LLC, partnership, sole proprietorship), asset purchase (any), and a couple of others.
In an asset purchase the assets are separated into a specifically delineated list. In other words it can't be written into the asset purchase agreement (APA) that it's "any and all assets." They must list them. They can expressly disclaim any liabilities, but that has to pass the smell test. There's a good discussion of this at: https://www.taftlaw.com/news-events/law-bulletins/successor-liability-risks-in-asset-purchase-ag reements
The gist is that in SOME cases --yes-- the buyer can really buy the assets, leave the seller the liabilities, and then the seller can do whatever they like (usually go out of business through dissolution or bankruptch). In SOME cases an asset is explicitly tied to a liability so by buying the asset the liability is also assumed.
If I had to guess, and I'm not a lawyer, in US copyright law (17 USC) there should be something, but a cursory look did not find it. Just because I say "there should be something doesn't mean there is."
Likely ADF is right, and they're just letting him pound on the edge of the moat and they won't bring the bridge down even after his hands are bloody and his feet can't stand. I personally don't think the royalties can be divorced from the right to the work, as it's an ongoing right vs an ongoing royalty.
If it was a one-time transaction "Look, ma, I bought this $20,000 widget on credit, and then sold the asset to John, and now I'll declare bankruptcy, and we can enjoy the widget for free" would be common. It isn't.
In the end we'll see how this plays out. If I had to guess... he either gets an awesome legal team and they win, or he signs the NDA and they work something out.
Attempting to divine some bright line to either justify some of their behavior, delineate other behavior as bad, separate the two, or do anything other than denounce it is like choosing "the nice racist shooter."
No such thing. Don't give them the battleground, the battle, or the chance to be heard. They have (seriously, MPAA and RIAA) the ability to be heard very easily without our help.
That's right. I own the copyright. Or not. Who knows. We'll find out together.
Publish the game under an open license. Any CC will work.
If any of the nice people who think they own the copyright come after me, well, we'll figure it out in court. THEY'LL have to prove ownership, If I lose, well gofundme is there.
remember they PAID for access to this, to the FCC. THey can revoke it
Nobody paid for access to whatever you're taking about. The FCC doesn't collect funds. I don't know who "THey" [sic] are that can revoke it[sic].
The government of the US is not running a business.
There is no "the backbone" and of the many that exist, the US "Gov." [sic] doesn't "manages it"[sic].
"I get the feeling Trump is a Nationalist" -- he said so. Are you high?
Maybe English just isn't your language... but I don't think you make any sense.
"THey can revoke it."
Yeah, sure THey [whatever] can revoke it [whatever].
"It's almost as if the US doesn't know...that they're a dictator culture."
To be fair the last 6 generations or so US residents grew up "knowing" they were a part of a republic, not a democracy. It should have been obvious to everyone there that the very second someone like DJT was elected the dictatorship would start, and the "two party, one nation" concept would last all the way until the very second someone actually tried to make use of a democratic right of a mironity which conflicted with dictator rule.
At least this was pretty obvious to all the international observers and you'd think that some kind soul might have had the moral courage to inform the people of the US that they could kiss any semblance of democracy bye-bye and the time to get out of Dodge was right then and there.
Why did
-- the Supreme Court of the United States
-- the Fifth District Court
-- any other decent person
not say anything about cleaning up these literal shitholes?
I suggest this:
It's 20201110. Take till the end of the year to triage, stage prisoners, move them, CLEAN CELLS, ROOT OUT THE SEWERS and treat prisoners in the US humanely -- that means "like humans".
As a corollary to that... any guard, officer, or warden who persists in perpetuating this... can find a new job 20210101.
I'd love to turn in my neighbors. They're not in Hong Kong, but the homeowners' association has done some movidos. Also this one guy painted his house in "non-desert colors". These need to be immediately brought up to the Chinese Communist Party. That's two calls right there. The neighbor's kid took my Lotus and went way faster than 25 -- in a NEIGHBORHOOD. Three calls.
Also a neighbor put up signs espousing support for an orange clown. The CC&Rs say NO SIGNS. So [yeah, I know political signs are allowed in the US, but not in Hong Kong!!!] I'll turn them in too. Four calls.
If I add in all the stuff my girlfriend said about Trump after Biden won... man that should give the CCP lots of things to worry about. All from different CLIDs, of course.
Well-written piece, and I agree that GPON makes fiber an attractive offering in terms of low-latency networks. High bandwidth is a function of the dollars spent at the CPE, switching, and central locations.
Copper has a bad rap. Two wire circuits (US) that were originally designed for 2400 baud and never upgraded were eventually being used for "up to 56Kbps" modems, then used as radio waveguides. Terabit DSL exists, and again -- whether you have 768Kbps or 1Gbps or terabit speeds is a function of the dollars spent on the infrastructure.
Wireless has a bad rap because it's been run by WISPs hungry for the "oversell model" which means they sell N x the actual capacity they have, figuring peaks will average out. [There's another TechDirt thread on this already.]
Designing networks is tough. You can design for mean usage ("average"), peak usage ("top of the curve") or mode usage ("most often the level needed). In each case you have to design to some percentage of that level. Is it 100% of the peak or only 95%? Is it 100% of the mode or 90%? Can you build it with the ability to generate temporarily higher usages ("spikes", "bursts")?
And finally in case anyone is still reading, the more successful you are in doing this in the US, no matter the layer-1 technology, you get to set the rates others pay you to transmit their data or transmit your data. It's called "settlement" and it's where all the Big Boys get to argue about whether Netflix should pay Level 3 or the other way around... for data that YOU'VE already paid to receive or send.
If you don't have that "successful" (volume) a network you don't get to do settlement-free peering or even settlements... you have to purchase an "upstream connection" (transit).
In the end, FIBER is not the solution. COPPER is not the solution. WIFI is not the solution. If the problem is delivering high-bandwidth low-latency connections to residences... we need to have an industry that doesn't depend on screwing every consumer every month to do it.
Dane at Sonic has done this. Others can follow suit.
To "still" provide "better service" they have to do it in the first place.
...and very likely better customer service.
Very likely not. SpaceX thinks in BILLIONS. WISPs think in millions.
It's fun to talk about "better customer service" but WISPs and cable companies don't care about anything more than acquisition of more customers than they lose -- the "churn."
That's not likely to change for terrestrial broadband, but SpaceX has the resources to make a difference. They also have more skin in the game than all the piddly cable companies and WISPs in the US... making success a requirement.
WISPs delivery service wirelessly. Often they do so from towers which are "fed" via wired (fiber optic or copper) service. Sometimes they are fed from other towers.
Unlike cell tower providers, there are no service level agreements (SLAs) requiring WISPs to provide a generator "shack" (container) and HVAC (cooling). In times of a dearth of power the WISPs can and do go offline, unlike cell towers which have between 2-24hrs of fuel, and are regularly replenished by fuel delivery companies.
I know HVAC is not an issue for many. Here in Arizona radio equipment will not survive the heat without cooling. Cooling requires power -- more than batteries and solar cells will provide. [heat degrades solar cells, batteries, and reduces circuit breaker capacity by around 20%].
WISPs are not the end-all of anything, and the naive article is amusing, because obviously the author[s] are unaware of various flaws in their topic. WISP operators ARE amateurs, and anybody stupid enough to "request uptime performance statistics and customer service call volume data" will be performing an exercise in NUNYAS.
"Companies moving out" ... "Avoid liability in the USA"
It's good to have fantasies.
Nobody's moving out. This is part of a process that started years ago and continues today. Nobody's left the US of the big content/UGC hosters.
Nobody avoids liability in the USA by "moving out" [whatever that means]. Just ask Kim Schmitz. [aka Kim DotCom]
Just because you wish something to be true and say it... won't create a self-fulfilling prophecy. It will just make you appear to say "COVID is cured" or "We've turned the corner" or something equally self-serving... and wrong.
If you wanna argue the point, name a large well-known UGC hosting firm that has left the country. In the alternative name a company that has "avoided" being subject to US law after leaving the country.
The rest is left as an exercise to those who assert but have no proof.
...people of all political persuasions are unhappy with the status quo.
No, that's an unfounded assertion. Even so, it's entirely irrelevant, and also anecdotal.
People want to know...
Well sure, and I want to know how much Orange Clown steals from the White House, but MY DESIRE TO KNOW does not create a REQUIREMENT for me to get this information, nor a law. Even a "real-life" law like FOIA is often obfuscated by redactions, evasions, and with this administration outright "We don't have to, and the Senate won't do anything" responses.
CDA sec 230 has nothing in there to "balance" out what "people want" and whether "people are unhappy." It's about enshrining a right to allow user-generated-content (UCG) not to reflect on hosting platforms that follow copyright law.
The "lawmakers" (rotten pork-barrel politics farmers who got elected and immediately said they're not here to represent us... because they know better) will destroy this right... to claim a victory against successful companies (Google, Youtube, Instagram, Facebook, Wikipedia, Youtube, and the millions of sites that allow comments, such as this one).
When Sony sued George Hotz I gave away my PS4 and have never bought a Sony product again.
When Microsoft terminated "hacked" accounts without allowing re-signup or refunds, I got rid of my Microsoft products and have never bought any again.
Nintendo has been such a huge thorn I've never bought their products.
PC games are generally built for [Microsoft] Windows so I don't buy those. I realize Steam is an option to run them under Linux/WINE.
So at the end of the day, until a majority say "enough is enough" these companies will continue doing exactly what they've been doing for LITERALLY DECADES.
On the post: Disney (Disney!) Accused Of Trying To Lawyer Its Way Out Of Paying Royalties To Alan Dean Foster
Re: Tough Choices
I get it, but let's play the game:
Someone gave me a "single-use time machine" and HARDCODED it so I could either kill Hitler or Disney and nobody else?
That makes as much as the "downloading alien virus to mothership" Goldblum used in the Independence Day movie. "Jeff, we need a way to upload a virus to the mothership stat!" "Hold on, I'm writing a GUI first.
"We need you to build a time machine so we can travel back in time, change something, and affect the future (today)." "Hold on, I'm installing an A/B switch for Hitler/Disney."
I get the point you're trying to make... who is worse... Hitler or Disney. Each did horrible things and deserves to die. However, the reason time-paradox travel doesn't exist is because it can't work. Time moves inexorably forward.
Playing along.
Hypothetical one: You go back in time and kill Hitler. The V-2 is never built. The US doesn't go to the moon. SpaceX is never formed, and many other things.
Hypothetical two: You go back in time and kill Disney. Copyright isn't weaponized but lots of great "Disney classics" are never made either. So would I rather live in a world with no Mulan, Hercules, Cinderella, Beauty, Snow White, etc. but copyrights are as free as CC licenses?
I'll stick with "time travel can't exist" and if it did, instead of an A/B switch I'd have the engineer take the time (we have infinite time because we're going back in time) and change that damn switch to a selectable range of time and go back and watch the dawn of time knowing that I have great views... and killing one man won't improve the world into one Possible Perfect Future (thanks, Gene R!).
I'll stop now.
E
On the post: Disney (Disney!) Accused Of Trying To Lawyer Its Way Out Of Paying Royalties To Alan Dean Foster
Asset Purchase
There are many ways to do a merger or acquisition. Those include stock purchase (corporation), interest purchase (LLC, partnership, sole proprietorship), asset purchase (any), and a couple of others.
In an asset purchase the assets are separated into a specifically delineated list. In other words it can't be written into the asset purchase agreement (APA) that it's "any and all assets." They must list them. They can expressly disclaim any liabilities, but that has to pass the smell test. There's a good discussion of this at:
https://www.taftlaw.com/news-events/law-bulletins/successor-liability-risks-in-asset-purchase-ag reements
The gist is that in SOME cases --yes-- the buyer can really buy the assets, leave the seller the liabilities, and then the seller can do whatever they like (usually go out of business through dissolution or bankruptch). In SOME cases an asset is explicitly tied to a liability so by buying the asset the liability is also assumed.
If I had to guess, and I'm not a lawyer, in US copyright law (17 USC) there should be something, but a cursory look did not find it. Just because I say "there should be something doesn't mean there is."
Likely ADF is right, and they're just letting him pound on the edge of the moat and they won't bring the bridge down even after his hands are bloody and his feet can't stand. I personally don't think the royalties can be divorced from the right to the work, as it's an ongoing right vs an ongoing royalty.
If it was a one-time transaction "Look, ma, I bought this $20,000 widget on credit, and then sold the asset to John, and now I'll declare bankruptcy, and we can enjoy the widget for free" would be common. It isn't.
In the end we'll see how this plays out. If I had to guess... he either gets an awesome legal team and they win, or he signs the NDA and they work something out.
E
On the post: If A College Is Going To Make COVID-19 Contact Tracing Apps Mandatory, They Should At Least Be Secure
Re:
I think you meant to post in a different thread...
Cheers,
Ehud
On the post: Despite RIAA's Claim That YouTube-dl Is Infringing, Journalists Use It All The Time
Actions taken by the MFIAA
They're all evil. MPAA, RIAA, BSA, -- all evil.
Attempting to divine some bright line to either justify some of their behavior, delineate other behavior as bad, separate the two, or do anything other than denounce it is like choosing "the nice racist shooter."
No such thing. Don't give them the battleground, the battle, or the chance to be heard. They have (seriously, MPAA and RIAA) the ability to be heard very easily without our help.
When they choose to remove our rights,
Fuck them.
Cheers,
E
On the post: Happy 20th Birthday To 'No One Lives Forever', The Classic PC Game That Can't Be Sold Today Thanks To IP
I own the copyright. Use it as you will.
That's right. I own the copyright. Or not. Who knows. We'll find out together.
Publish the game under an open license. Any CC will work.
If any of the nice people who think they own the copyright come after me, well, we'll figure it out in court. THEY'LL have to prove ownership, If I lose, well gofundme is there.
E
On the post: Supreme Court Reverses Decision Granting Qualified Immunity To Guards Who Threw An Inmate Into A 'Feces-Covered' Cell
hard things
hard things. heh heh.
/beavis & butthead
E
On the post: We Do Not Have the Internet We Deserve
Nobody paid for access to whatever you're taking about. The FCC doesn't collect funds. I don't know who "THey" [sic] are that can revoke it[sic].
The government of the US is not running a business.
There is no "the backbone" and of the many that exist, the US "Gov." [sic] doesn't "manages it"[sic].
"I get the feeling Trump is a Nationalist" -- he said so. Are you high?
Maybe English just isn't your language... but I don't think you make any sense.
"THey can revoke it."
Yeah, sure THey [whatever] can revoke it [whatever].
Get some sleep.
E
On the post: China's Hong Kong Protester-Targeting 'See Something, Say Something' Hotline Is A Big Success
Re: Re: who you callin' "you people"
"It's almost as if the US doesn't know...that they're a dictator culture."
To be fair the last 6 generations or so US residents grew up "knowing" they were a part of a republic, not a democracy. It should have been obvious to everyone there that the very second someone like DJT was elected the dictatorship would start, and the "two party, one nation" concept would last all the way until the very second someone actually tried to make use of a democratic right of a mironity which conflicted with dictator rule.
At least this was pretty obvious to all the international observers and you'd think that some kind soul might have had the moral courage to inform the people of the US that they could kiss any semblance of democracy bye-bye and the time to get out of Dodge was right then and there.
TFTFY
E
On the post: Supreme Court Reverses Decision Granting Qualified Immunity To Guards Who Threw An Inmate Into A 'Feces-Covered' Cell
Shit covered cells in US prisons
I guess the begged question in all this is...
Why did
-- the Supreme Court of the United States
-- the Fifth District Court
-- any other decent person
not say anything about cleaning up these literal shitholes?
I suggest this:
It's 20201110. Take till the end of the year to triage, stage prisoners, move them, CLEAN CELLS, ROOT OUT THE SEWERS and treat prisoners in the US humanely -- that means "like humans".
As a corollary to that... any guard, officer, or warden who persists in perpetuating this... can find a new job 20210101.
Is this not common sense?
E
On the post: China's Hong Kong Protester-Targeting 'See Something, Say Something' Hotline Is A Big Success
I love hotlines...
How can I get this hotline? There are lots of articles ABOUT the hotline, but not with a number. Here's an example: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-54835955
I'd love to turn in my neighbors. They're not in Hong Kong, but the homeowners' association has done some movidos. Also this one guy painted his house in "non-desert colors". These need to be immediately brought up to the Chinese Communist Party. That's two calls right there. The neighbor's kid took my Lotus and went way faster than 25 -- in a NEIGHBORHOOD. Three calls.
Also a neighbor put up signs espousing support for an orange clown. The CC&Rs say NO SIGNS. So [yeah, I know political signs are allowed in the US, but not in Hong Kong!!!] I'll turn them in too. Four calls.
If I add in all the stuff my girlfriend said about Trump after Biden won... man that should give the CCP lots of things to worry about. All from different CLIDs, of course.
What was that hotline number again?
E
On the post: We Do Not Have the Internet We Deserve
Fiber vs copper vs wireless
Well-written piece, and I agree that GPON makes fiber an attractive offering in terms of low-latency networks. High bandwidth is a function of the dollars spent at the CPE, switching, and central locations.
Copper has a bad rap. Two wire circuits (US) that were originally designed for 2400 baud and never upgraded were eventually being used for "up to 56Kbps" modems, then used as radio waveguides. Terabit DSL exists, and again -- whether you have 768Kbps or 1Gbps or terabit speeds is a function of the dollars spent on the infrastructure.
Wireless has a bad rap because it's been run by WISPs hungry for the "oversell model" which means they sell N x the actual capacity they have, figuring peaks will average out. [There's another TechDirt thread on this already.]
Designing networks is tough. You can design for mean usage ("average"), peak usage ("top of the curve") or mode usage ("most often the level needed). In each case you have to design to some percentage of that level. Is it 100% of the peak or only 95%? Is it 100% of the mode or 90%? Can you build it with the ability to generate temporarily higher usages ("spikes", "bursts")?
And finally in case anyone is still reading, the more successful you are in doing this in the US, no matter the layer-1 technology, you get to set the rates others pay you to transmit their data or transmit your data. It's called "settlement" and it's where all the Big Boys get to argue about whether Netflix should pay Level 3 or the other way around... for data that YOU'VE already paid to receive or send.
If you don't have that "successful" (volume) a network you don't get to do settlement-free peering or even settlements... you have to purchase an "upstream connection" (transit).
In the end, FIBER is not the solution. COPPER is not the solution. WIFI is not the solution. If the problem is delivering high-bandwidth low-latency connections to residences... we need to have an industry that doesn't depend on screwing every consumer every month to do it.
Dane at Sonic has done this. Others can follow suit.
Ehud
On the post: WISPs Are Helping Communities Stay Connected And Safe During The Crisis... And Beyond
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: StarLink may be the end for many WISPs
Well, we do agree on Orange Clown.
Cheers,
E
On the post: WISPs Are Helping Communities Stay Connected And Safe During The Crisis... And Beyond
Re: Re: Re: Re: StarLink may be the end for many WISPs
AH, of course. Whenever there's an argumentative response that contributes no facts, research, or anything other than bile - it's PaulT.
Have a great weekend. Sorry your candidates lost.
E
On the post: WISPs Are Helping Communities Stay Connected And Safe During The Crisis... And Beyond
Re: Re: StarLink may be the end for many WISPs
To "still" provide "better service" they have to do it in the first place.
Very likely not. SpaceX thinks in BILLIONS. WISPs think in millions.
It's fun to talk about "better customer service" but WISPs and cable companies don't care about anything more than acquisition of more customers than they lose -- the "churn."
That's not likely to change for terrestrial broadband, but SpaceX has the resources to make a difference. They also have more skin in the game than all the piddly cable companies and WISPs in the US... making success a requirement.
E
On the post: WISPs Are Helping Communities Stay Connected And Safe During The Crisis... And Beyond
WISPs are only last-mile WISPs
WISPs delivery service wirelessly. Often they do so from towers which are "fed" via wired (fiber optic or copper) service. Sometimes they are fed from other towers.
Unlike cell tower providers, there are no service level agreements (SLAs) requiring WISPs to provide a generator "shack" (container) and HVAC (cooling). In times of a dearth of power the WISPs can and do go offline, unlike cell towers which have between 2-24hrs of fuel, and are regularly replenished by fuel delivery companies.
I know HVAC is not an issue for many. Here in Arizona radio equipment will not survive the heat without cooling. Cooling requires power -- more than batteries and solar cells will provide. [heat degrades solar cells, batteries, and reduces circuit breaker capacity by around 20%].
WISPs are not the end-all of anything, and the naive article is amusing, because obviously the author[s] are unaware of various flaws in their topic. WISP operators ARE amateurs, and anybody stupid enough to "request uptime performance statistics and customer service call volume data" will be performing an exercise in NUNYAS.
E
On the post: COVID-19 Is Driving The Uptake Of Chess -- And Of Surveillance Tools To Stop Online Players Cheating
spam
Thanks for the spam! Here's how it works:
take your spam and your PaulT agreement elsewhere.
E
On the post: Zuckerberg And Facebook Throw The Open Internet Under The Bus; Support Section 230 Reform
Re: Re: "Companies moving out" ... "Avoid liability in the USA"
I see you can't follow the simple rule of he who asserts must prove. Can't let it go, can you, kid?
Sorry, your answer is wrong on so many levels all I can say if you'd bothered to answer my challenge, I'd explain to you where your answer is wrong.
Section 230 protections in other countries. Oh PUhleeaaze. The EU I'm sure. Idiot.
E
On the post: Zuckerberg And Facebook Throw The Open Internet Under The Bus; Support Section 230 Reform
"Companies moving out" ... "Avoid liability in the USA"
It's good to have fantasies.
Nobody's moving out. This is part of a process that started years ago and continues today. Nobody's left the US of the big content/UGC hosters.
Nobody avoids liability in the USA by "moving out" [whatever that means]. Just ask Kim Schmitz. [aka Kim DotCom]
Just because you wish something to be true and say it... won't create a self-fulfilling prophecy. It will just make you appear to say "COVID is cured" or "We've turned the corner" or something equally self-serving... and wrong.
If you wanna argue the point, name a large well-known UGC hosting firm that has left the country. In the alternative name a company that has "avoided" being subject to US law after leaving the country.
The rest is left as an exercise to those who assert but have no proof.
Ehud
On the post: Zuckerberg And Facebook Throw The Open Internet Under The Bus; Support Section 230 Reform
"people" - what people?
No, that's an unfounded assertion. Even so, it's entirely irrelevant, and also anecdotal.
Well sure, and I want to know how much Orange Clown steals from the White House, but MY DESIRE TO KNOW does not create a REQUIREMENT for me to get this information, nor a law. Even a "real-life" law like FOIA is often obfuscated by redactions, evasions, and with this administration outright "We don't have to, and the Senate won't do anything" responses.
CDA sec 230 has nothing in there to "balance" out what "people want" and whether "people are unhappy." It's about enshrining a right to allow user-generated-content (UCG) not to reflect on hosting platforms that follow copyright law.
The "lawmakers" (rotten pork-barrel politics farmers who got elected and immediately said they're not here to represent us... because they know better) will destroy this right... to claim a victory against successful companies (Google, Youtube, Instagram, Facebook, Wikipedia, Youtube, and the millions of sites that allow comments, such as this one).
Is it RICO?
E
On the post: Nintendo Nukes 'Zelda' Fan Game, As Per Usual
Copyright Maximalism and Videogame Consoles
When Sony sued George Hotz I gave away my PS4 and have never bought a Sony product again.
When Microsoft terminated "hacked" accounts without allowing re-signup or refunds, I got rid of my Microsoft products and have never bought any again.
Nintendo has been such a huge thorn I've never bought their products.
PC games are generally built for [Microsoft] Windows so I don't buy those. I realize Steam is an option to run them under Linux/WINE.
So at the end of the day, until a majority say "enough is enough" these companies will continue doing exactly what they've been doing for LITERALLY DECADES.
VOTE. With your wallet. Also on November 3rd.
Ehud
Next >>