You could use the same argument for running a paedo site. "He's only providing a service. If there wasn't a demand for pictures of naked kids he wouldn't make any money"
23 posts • joined 27 Jan 2013
Okay, so before tax in the UK it is £357, at todays currency rates that means the equivalent in the US should be $556, or working the other way $499 in the USA would be £320. "But that's only £37 difference" if the One sells as many as the 360 in the UK, thats 8m units x £37 = £296m extra profit.
Bloody Currys let you go through setting up an account and putting in all your details before eventually telling you they don't actually have any, and they'll send one when they get them. I'll take a wild guess that as everywhere has sold out, and given the nature of the offer hints this stock clearance, they'll never have any to send out.
Isn't this supposed to be a case of copyright infringement? What evidence can their possibly be that is important to national security, unless the entire US battleplan for the war againts terrorism (the plan to continue with total slaughter until everyone's dead except President Obama, Mrs Obama and their tortoise, Alan) was put onto Megaupload.
There is absolutely nothing in a copyright case that warrants a secret hearing.
The whole "But we're an American corporation, your laws don't apply to us" is beginning to wind me up. Fine, if thats the way you want to play it fair enough, internet based companies can only be held accountable in their country of origin.
But it does mean the USA has tp stop doing crap like this as well
I had someone contact me on plenty of fish. Apparently Natalie Imbruglia had changed her name, and moved to Grimsby, and was looking for lurve lol. What I could never get my head around was women including pictures of their kids. Aside from the fact that photo with six kids would put a lot of men off, who in their right minds puts photos of their kids on a site like that.
“method for providing a consumer with the ability to access and collect health records … through use of a consumer address”.
That pretty much nails any system for providing information on a patient, including paper files (Health records) with a patients name and address on them (consumer address).
These are Australian Patents, which means that the Oz patent system is as bad as that in the US. Does this mean the US Patent office can sue the Australian government for patent infringement? "Patent 0000001: A patent system designed to allow spurious, wide open and vague of meaning patents to be filed, without any proof that the applicant has made any effort to actually design or make anything workable, or provide any proof of concept, and has merely thrown some words in a random sentence generator."
"Apple and Samsung are currently embroiled in more than 40 lawsuits in the US, Europe, Asia, and Australia, as each tries to use the courts to gain market advantage over the other"
And who's paying for all this. Maybe if they stopped all these stupid, pointless law suits which cost millions, they wouldn't have to charge such ridiculous prices for the bloody phones in the first place. Ultimately its us, the muggins, that pay for these bloody expensive lawyers.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019