SPAM random annoying things

[old.Tohtori]

Thought you meant these Scouse;

 

[TdC]

that's right, with my yellow walkman sports, yo

 

[Scouse]

Thought you meant these Scouse

It had occured to me. But hawks with glasses on? Get out of here!

 

[Gwadien]

Playing a strat game, you've practically won, but some cunt without anything just hides single units so you can't win.

 

[TdC]

actually, while searching for useful images of yellow walkmans, I came across this: http://www.retropod.com/

which is basically a case for everything I hate about corporations laid bare. meh.

 

[DaGaffer]

actually, while searching for useful images of yellow walkmans, I came across this: http://www.retropod.com/

which is basically a case for everything I hate about corporations laid bare. meh.

Er, why? He was selling the fucking thing with Sony's logo on it. What else is Sony supposed to do? If you don't protect trademarks, you lose them.

 

[TdC]

tbh that particular walkman had been EOL for like, a million years and I don't think cassette tapes even exist any more. Shouldn't Sony have been happy someone was doing things with stuff that is now basically...garbage?

 

[DaGaffer]

tbh that particular walkman had been EOL for like, a million years and I don't think cassette tapes even exist any more. Shouldn't Sony have been happy someone was doing things with stuff that is now basically...garbage?

No. I can see their point entirely. If it was a personal project, fine, but once he starts selling them Sony, as a corporate entity, have no choice but to respond.

 

[TdC]

I can kind-of get it, but still should they not be happy that their brand is still "out there" and even better, hiding another? I mean, like I said a cassette walkman is basically garbage so why care?

 

[TdC]

oh, wait, it's cos someone other than Sony is making the money, no? dammit I'm turning in to Scouse

 

[dysfunction]

The problem is people may think it's been made by Sony. If it's a Crap product then it could damage their reputation for making quality products.

Yes it's free advertising but you don't want your brand messed about with by outsiders.

 

[rynnor]

I'm not sure if its annoying or just pathetically amusing - has anyone watched 'World War 2 in HD Colour' its so awful it looks like a child with about 6 crayons did the colourisation

Black and white pictures with the sea coloured an unrealistic blue is not colour.

Scenes of white people where everyone is a uniform flesh colour is not colour.

 

[DaGaffer]

I can kind-of get it, but still should they not be happy that their brand is still "out there" and even better, hiding another? I mean, like I said a cassette walkman is basically garbage so why care?

It doesn't really matter what the product is, if you let someone sell stuff with your logo on it without your permission, you lose the right to protect that logo in the future. Once a precedent is set, others can cite that implicit permission and use the logo as well. Its the cornerstone of trademark protection, you have to protect your marks or you lose the rights to them.

 

[Scouse]

Sony, as a corporate entity, have no choice but to respond.

True. But we don't have to like it.

Bloke had a good idea, started making a bit of cash off it, big corporation acting like big corporation naturally does stops him doing it.

Technically Sony is correct. In actuality it still makes them cunts.

Corporations are cunts because of the way they are - rightly or wrongly.

 

[DaGaffer]

True. But we don't have to like it.

Bloke had a good idea, started making a bit of cash off it, big corporation acting like big corporation naturally does stops him doing it.

Technically Sony is correct. In actuality it still makes them cunts.

Corporations are cunts because of the way they are - rightly or wrongly.

No, they're not, read what I said above. Its not because they're a corporation, its because they own a trademark, and if you think about it for a millisecond, trademark protection has to work that way or logos and marks would be a waste of time.

 

[Scouse]

Its not because they're a corporation, its because they own a trademark, and if you think about it for a millisecond, trademark protection has to work that way or logos and marks would be a waste of time.

I understand that perfectly. Protection of their trademarks make corporations act like cunts.

It was a good little product. Effectively harmless. Was going to earn him a bit of cash. It's a damn shame that he had to stop producing them.


I don't give a fuck about Sony's image. Or trademarks. Sony's shareholders are already rich. Sony is pretty damn successful. The kid was doing zero to very little harm. Boo-hoo they may lose their trademark.

Copyright sucks balls

 

[rynnor]

The problem is people may think it's been made by Sony. If it's a Crap product then it could damage their reputation for making quality products.

Yes it's free advertising but you don't want your brand messed about with by outsiders.

Exactly! Its also taking a free ride on the back of somebody elses design tbh - make one for yourself - fine, make a few for friends - also fine but mass producing and selling them commercially should have been an obvious no-no?

 

[DaGaffer]

I understand that perfectly. Protection of their trademarks make corporations act like cunts.

It was a good little product. Effectively harmless. Was going to earn him a bit of cash. It's a damn shame that he had to stop producing them.


I don't give a fuck about Sony's image. Or trademarks. Sony's shareholders are already rich. Sony is pretty damn successful. The kid was doing zero to very little harm. Boo-hoo they may lose their trademark.

Copyright sucks balls

I'm sorry you're being stupid. Its not harmless. Today its some guy making Walkman covers, but if Sony let it happen tomorrow its a Chinese factory churning out fake PS3s, and they wouldn't be able to do a damn thing about it legally because they didn't protect their marks. Trademarks serve a useful purpose as well as creating value for their owners. Throwing them into your general anti-intellectual-property little bag of prejudices is a failure to understand what Trademarks actually do.

 

[Scouse]

I do understand that Gaff. I really do. It's a shitty system though.

I stand by it being a damn shame that he had to stop producing them.

 

[Raven]

Playing a strat game, you've practically won, but some cunt without anything just hides single units so you can't win.

We used to do that on red alert. Hide the submarine!

 

[dysfunction]

I do understand that Gaff. I really do. It's a shitty system though.

I stand by it being a damn shame that he had to stop producing them.

No it's not a shitty system.

I bet if you worked hard for years and created a superb quality brand and someone just went along and destroyed it within minutes you may think quite differently.

He didn't have to stop. He could have done it a different way.

 

[TdC]

imo it's not mooching off someone else's design or anything lame like that, and it's certainly NOT about "Sony, the brand". He left the design as is but did something different with the end product, eg ripping out the useless insides and turning it into a portable shrine to the faux hipster gods (a real hipster would use actual cassettes ofc). A reuse of part of a product that would otherwise end up clogging up some landfill somewhere. Imo what he did is AWESOME. Fwiw I don't give two figs about Sony's trademark or what the corporate lawyers come up with to keep their jobs: a) Sony does not produce walkman style iPod cases. b) the (sports) walkman is obsolete, end of life, junk. c) Sony has already recouped their R&D and made a tidy profit d) imo every man and his dog should be free to engage their creativity like this because it's AWESOME. So there. Ofc, hey, what do I know about anything

 

[Chilly]

The proposed closure of a major hospital services.

http://www.savelewishamhospital.com/

These closure proposals are utter madness.

A&E wards are often understaffed. It's been shown to be better overall with fewer, better provisioned A&E centres that can each cater for all major trauma types instead of splitting the specialisms across a group of hospitals in a region.

NIMBYism, shrug.

 

[dysfunction]

A&E wards are often understaffed. It's been shown to be better overall with fewer, better provisioned A&E centres that can each cater for all major trauma types instead of splitting the specialisms across a group of hospitals in a region.

NIMBYism, shrug.

The thing is that they have just spent a lot of money doing up the A&E centre and the Maternity wards. Both of which will be closed.

The current government morons are trying to penalise Lewisham because it's an easy target. It's is handling its money affairs very well. Its other trusts that are in debt and in order to get them out of their mess they are cutting Lewisham services.

It will also cost about £170m to shut down the services.

 

[rynnor]

d) imo every man and his dog should be free to engage their creativity like this because it's AWESOME. So there. Ofc, hey, what do I know about anything

Everyone is free to make their own but this guy clearly crossed a line opening his own shop and mass producing them to flog commercially.

 

[TdC]

that's the thing. he did open a shop, yes, but mass produce? flog commercially? as to the former, he was making that stuff by hand in his spare time, and the latter...he was charging 100 bucks (prolly american) for shits and giggles. That's hardly "produced by the 100000's in a chinese sweat factory" scale Ryn mate

 

[DaGaffer]

that's the thing. he did open a shop, yes, but mass produce? flog commercially? as to the former, he was making that stuff by hand in his spare time, and the latter...he was charging 100 bucks (prolly american) for shits and giggles. That's hardly "produced by the 100000's in a chinese sweat factory" scale Ryn mate

It doesn't matter if its one or a hundred thousand. If you sell it, at all, Sony have to protect their marks. There's no wiggle room. I've actually been on the "protecting marks" side of this process, and its a fucking pain in the arse. There are almost certainly people sat in Sony looking at what he's done and admiring it and even wanting one themselves, but they have an obligation to stop it.

 

[TdC]

I know that Gaff, I just don't like it... mostly because I personally think in this case there's a large difference between someone being creative and fabricating something out of junk themselves, with their own hands, and putting it on the market for fuck-off prices, and some sinister rip-off organisation making 10 million unlicensed Atari t-shirts to sell for 10 dollaholla on markets all over the world.

 

[rynnor]

that's the thing. he did open a shop, yes, but mass produce? flog commercially? as to the former, he was making that stuff by hand in his spare time, and the latter...he was charging 100 bucks (prolly american) for shits and giggles. That's hardly "produced by the 100000's in a chinese sweat factory" scale Ryn mate

He must have made hundreds though to support a shop and online sales and if sony did nothing there would be nothing to stop him properly mass producing them in China.

Are you really taken in by that 'I did it for giggles' not to make money stuff? He opened a shop to flog them - this is not a 'for giggles' enterprise but I can see why a person nicking someone elses trademark would want to present it as such.

 

[TdC]

He must have made hundreds though to support a shop and online sales and if sony did nothing there would be nothing to stop him properly mass producing them in China.

Are you really taken in by that 'I did it for giggles' not to make money stuff? He opened a shop to flog them - this is not a 'for giggles' enterprise but I can see why a person nicking someone elses trademark would want to present it as such.

I don't know what he made. All I know is that he at least made two. What stopped him mass producing them in China (imo) is the fact that he really was producing them for the hell of it. I find I am siding on the side of the people here; I don't know if that is a good thing. I am hoping that dude made his shit for the hell of it, and that he deliberately priced the cases at the ridiculous amount he did in the semi hope that nobody would buy them. I don't think that he deliberately set out to steal Sony's trade-mark, or the design of a walkman. I think that thought is exactly the slant a corporate lawyer would go for and what gives indoctrinated exec's a massive hard on. I don't buy it for one second. That would be like whoever owns the duct-tape trade-mark stamping all over me because I hand-fabricate wallets and other shit from it and call them...wait for it....duct-tape wallets and other shit and may charge someone for the pleasure of owning one. I'm not an evil ripper-offer (*cough*), and I personally do not believe that iPod case guy is either.