Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop


Forgot your password?
Slashdot Deals: Cyber Monday Sale Extended! Courses ranging from coding to project management - all eLearning deals 20% off with coupon code "CYBERMONDAY20". ×

Comment Re:Business (Score 1) 212

if you know the law then you should also know that if a company doesn't proactively protect its copyrights, they risk it being classified as abandoned and losing it to the public domain.

Incorrect. First off, you cannot lose copyright for not defending it - that's trademarks. Secondly, you are not required to "proactively protect" your trademark against all infringement in order to risk losing it; only against major infringements. In most cases, major infringements are meant to mean something that would cause confusion as to which company actually owns the trademarks. Unless you're arguing that people would have thought Ramar Larkin Jones was the actual owner of Pokemon because he was throwing a party, then the mark would never be in jeopardy from this use.

Comment Re:If that's how Pokemon Int'l treats its fans... (Score 5, Insightful) 212

"Defending your trademark" does not mean "suing anyone who doesn't pay you to use it". As long as there's no brand confusion being caused it doesn't need to be defended. As per the Wikipedia article: "It is not necessary for a trademark owner to take enforcement action against all infringement if it can be shown that the owner perceived the infringement to be minor and inconsequential."

Arguably, you can even let infringement go in many larger instances as long as they're not believed to cause brand confusion. Look at Star Wars - George Lucas has allowed fan-made works to do a helluvalot that would get them sued by just about any other IP-based company out there. He's even commented on fan works, showing that he is quite aware of them. None of this permissiveness with his trademarks has ever led to him coming even close to losing the brand.

Comment Re:Why are Bidets not as popular in America? (Score 2) 269

Well, let's see - right from the article you linked:

They are not necessarily meant to replace the use of toilet paper. Often they are used after some paper to achieve full cleanliness without immediately having to take a shower.


The expense of remodeling a typical North American bathroom to accommodate a traditional bidet fixture is large, in the thousands of dollars

However, it does go on to say that recent advances in combination toilet/bidets are causing more widespread adoption in North America.

Comment Re:For starters... (Score 1) 842

I mean, hell...the ONLY reason I work, is to earn enough $$$$ to support my lifestyle. If I didn't have to earn the money, I'd certainly not be working...and I"d have a blast till I died.

Generally speaking, once you have enough money so you don't have to work, many of the pressures of work go away (you're not worried about getting fired, etc.). If you're actually independently wealthy, you typically start your own business doing some type of work that you really find fulfilling. You generally won't work for someone else unless you really want to work for them (i.e. getting your "dream job", or working with someone you idolize).

The reason you will still work with ridiculously wealthy is because if you don't work you'll soon get bored, or start to feel like a worthless leech only taking from society, but not giving anything back. It's the same reason why so many retirees go out and get jobs they don't really need.

Comment Re:Basic Income (Score 1) 61

There's a problem here. The most likely first response is the cost of a place to live going up over $250/month. Those who have the power to set prices are likely to see that as just an opportunity to increase prices.

The problem with this logic is twofold.

First, you can't simply increase rent because people are making more money; people remember for years what they think the cost of things should be, and are reluctant to pay more than that, and will shop around for a better deal. So, while company A decides to raise prices, Company B decides not to do so, and gets more business because of this and still results in an increase in profits (due to a sale rate closer to capacity).

Secondly, an increase in price in one area of an industry, especially the budget options, causes a ripple effect increasing the prices of everything in an industry. While this may cause a short-term price increase, factors will return it to a lower equilibrium. If you do a 20-50% increase in rent for budget apartments (which could only happen with a cartel controlling almost all apartments in a city), it will start to increase everything else in the housing market. If budget apartments suddenly cost as much as midrange, then why would you rent budget? This leads to an increase in midrange rental, increasing prices there, so more people go expensive or buy a house/condo. This causes people to leave the rental market, so suddenly you have empty budget apartments all over the place. To rent those out again, the prices will have to start to come down.

Comment Re:Done to _gouge_ the customer better (Score 2) 379

Except that NO other companies do this. And if people actually abandon Xerox, and HP, Epson, etc. see Xerox losing customers, they will not adopt the same policies, and Xerox is likely to reverse their decision to adopt regional encoding.

There is no need for government regulation here. The market will fix this.

History has proven your assumptions wrong. People will gripe, grumble, and complain, but the companies won't care. Not enough people will leave Xerox over this to make a noticeable difference. Once HP / etc.start coming out with their next generations of printers, you can bet they'll be including this same region-locking tech in them. This is the same thing that happened when manufacturers started using microchips to decide you were out of ink based on the number of pages printed instead of actual ink levels; it pissed all the consumers off, but every manufacturer adopted it, so WTF are you supposed to do about it?

Comment Re:More social decay. (Score 4, Insightful) 319

However, lies to strangers and casual acquaintances are a different thing than lies to someone who is supposed to be able to have implicit trust in you. I'm not talking about small lies like "I'm on my way right now" when you'd totally forgotten something, but the big important ones like "I'm swear not fucking the babysitter." It's a sheer betrayal on a personal level - it causes emotional pain and suffering, and is of the type that such relationships almost never recover from.

e-credibility: the non-guaranteeable likelihood that the electronic data you're seeing is genuine rather than somebody's made-up crap. - Karl Lehenbauer