There are no development or distribution fees if not using the Apple store There is a yearly developer license to access Apple developer resources if I remember. A developer can purchase a Mac and develop whatever they want without paying Apple; however, distributing software is much easier to use the Apple ecosystem..

What are you talking about? Putting a name inside code has never caused the trademark to be abandoned. By that logic, IBM lost all trademark rights if they ever release code with their name in it like: "Copyrighted by IBM Corporation"

Your specific filing only shows that a Court of Appeals agreed with the district court on granting a preliminary injunction. It does not shows the court ruling. In fact it specifically states: "This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3"

And how is that remotely related to the topic where he did not write nor approve Notepad++ for Mac? Basically according to you, he's a bad person so his legitimate complaint that someone is using the trademarked name of his software without permission can be ignored.

The messages are immutable. The situation can be fixed. Those are two different things. Those Copilot authorship messages always be in repository for those projects.

The point is there should be a normal process. There should be a review process. There should have been notification about changes. And of course such changes should have been documented. The change was approved and pushed. Later MS admitted they did not thoroughly test the ramifications while also admitting testing found issues with the change . . . yet they pushed the change anyway.

The point of version control systems is to track version changes. The value of these systems would be less if anyone can make changes later to alter the version history.

My understanding is that change can easily be done before the code has been pushed. Once it is pushed, then it creates all sorts of problems downstream. A version control system would be of less value if version history could be changed later whenever someone wanted. To me it seems the easiest way would be to abandon those branches and fork new ones. That does not erase the messages but remain in a different branch thus they are permanent. The new fork would be without these Copilot authorship messages.

For this reason some projects like open source forbid AI generated code as it brings copyright into question.

Even if we accept your premise as true, how will the government’s actions solve the problem? The current ban allows for existing models to be sold; however, modifications will remove the exemption. Firmware updates are considered modifications. The government is thus ensuring that backdoors remain on the device. Second, you mention professional equipment but those were not included in the ban. Thus backdoors can remain on that equipment too. Lastly, moving the assembly of the router to the US only means that now a US factory worker is installing the backdoors instead of a foreign one. That factory worker's job to install firmware; they do not know if it has backdoors.

Because Maine does not want new datacenters, network communications like TCP/IP stops working across state lines?

None so far.

Logistics is not the new hotness. The new hotness is YOLO.

But . . . but won't anyone think about their freedom?

1) It's a temporary ban not a permanent one. 2) There have been no major datacenter projects in Maine yet. 3) One of the reasons for the ban is to allow the state to assess infrastructure changes. Some of these datacenters are being built with a "If you build it, they will come" attitude when it comes to infrastructure demands like electricity and water. In decades past when companies built datacenters, they had to plan for these things and some datacenters built their own power and water plants.

If you have looked at Windows laptops recently that's already happened. RAM and SSDs are soldered on many of them.

Apple working with Adobe to make sure their flagship program works is a very different thing than accusing Apple of conspiring with Adobe to rig performance metrics to fool consumers in thinking the M1 was faster than it is.