You could ask the same about the US - in many areas of the US aquifers are being drained far, far faster than they are being replenished...

People (employees) pay income tax, not companies/corporations.

Taxes on profits are nearly always "Corporation Tax" which is not an income tax. Income taxes (22% for most of most peoples income above a certain threshold) are paid by the individual, but it is usually taxed "at source" so the company pays it to HMRC before the employee receives the payment making it appears as if the company pays it...

If they are not paying "Income Tax" on the wages paid to their employees, they are in MAJOR trouble as are their employees, who will be liable to pay the tax, even though the company avoided it. The article, though, talks about them not paying CORPORATION tax - a whole different matter.

I don't know why Slashdot chose to use the phrase "Income Tax" in the title, which makes this highly confusing...

Dear $publisher$ I will not be buying your new game, $title$, because it requires me to be connected to the internet in order to play it. A significant amount of my gaming time is spent on planes and trains, and in the outhouse while visiting family - during none of which I would be able to play your game.

This is a shame, as I would like to play it in order to take part in the inevitable conversations with my friends regarding the game, who will all have download a warez copy around 48 before your game hits the store shelves I won't be buying it from.

Yours,

Russ

Given that we have 38 of them every year, this might not be feasible...

But all that money that "family guys" are spending - that's ALSO on products for which advertisers want to target you. The new 4x4, mortgage, insurance, family holidays, cleaning products, kids toys etc. etc.

Those are all products that get advertised heavily too, so the theory that "gays have more discretionary spend" doesn't necessarily lead to "gays are worth more per click".

* Accenture is the main developer

Found your problem. Right there.

If they "just filed a patent" , and Google has already been using it:
i)Why would Google have to pay royalty?

Didn't the USA just become a "first-to-file" nation?

Well - obviously not. But should they be denied the ability to play the game? How much further would you take it - if the next generation of Windows required to be on line would it be fair to remove their computers?

How is this significantly different from requiring a certain generation of graphics card? Or a minimum amount of RAM? Or having a PC instead of a Mac?

In order to provide the game experience they want to provide (which is what you're paying for) the developers have decided to place certain requirements on the equipment required to play. If you don't have the required equipment, you will be unable to play.

I really don't understand all the hoo-ha - maybe the people who don't have a reliable net connection should buy one of the MYRIAD of competing products which don't have that requirement?

You probably wouldn't say that if you loved in a remote location. For some people connecting to the internet means driving to a wifi-enabled cafe or buying a satellite connection, i.e. the majority of situations they can't connect.

Perhaps those people are not the target market for this game, then?

The WWI idea that the "third light" was unlucky, so they extinguished the match after lighting two

"Fish *** in it"
- Captain Reggie Thistleton