[News] Many New Products from Debt-approaching Microsoft: Intellectual Monopolies - Linux

This is a discussion on [News] Many New Products from Debt-approaching Microsoft: Intellectual Monopolies - Linux ; "Phil Da Lick!" writes: > Moshe Goldfarb. wrote: >> On Sun, 28 Sep 2008 22:21:01 +0100, Phil Da Lick! wrote: >> >>> Moshe Goldfarb. wrote: >>>> So why should a compnay that did not spend a dime on research profit ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 21 to 40 of 40

Thread: [News] Many New Products from Debt-approaching Microsoft: Intellectual Monopolies

  1. Re: [News] Many New Products from Debt-approaching Microsoft: Intellectual Monopolies

    "Phil Da Lick!" writes:

    > Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:
    >> On Sun, 28 Sep 2008 22:21:01 +0100, Phil Da Lick! wrote:
    >>
    >>> Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:
    >>>> So why should a compnay that did not spend a dime on research profit by
    >>>> being able to manufacture and sell the same product?
    >>> Taking a product with a a complete roadmap to market certainly does
    >>> not cost zero and you know better than that.

    >>
    >> But it still cost a hell of a lot less than the R&D the original company
    >> had to lay out.
    >> Also you negate the fact that the original company has to design a roadmap,
    >> marketing plan, packageing etc as well.
    >>
    >> So I ask again, why should one company design the product and others can
    >> sell it as well without having foot the bill for the R&D?

    >
    >
    > That's the way the world works. As I've said before, it's not perfect
    > but its betetr than communism. You meantion cheap chinese knockoffs in


    You are insane.

    You are equating protecting someones R&D with communism!

    You ignorant prick. Go read this:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McCarthyism


  2. Re: [News] Many New Products from Debt-approaching Microsoft: IntellectualMonopolies

    Hadron wrote:


    You're advocating restricting people's right to compete. Whilst not
    quite communism its certainly the first step down that road. You
    cowardly ****, put your products on the market based on their quality
    and stop moaning that joe bloggs down the road is also selling whatever
    the hell it is you sell.

  3. Re: [News] Many New Products from Debt-approaching Microsoft: Intellectual Monopolies

    After takin' a swig o' grog, Hadron belched out
    this bit o' wisdom:

    > You are insane.
    >
    > You are equating protecting someones R&D with communism!
    >
    > You ignorant prick. Go read this:
    >
    > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McCarthyism


    http://www.100monkeystyping.com/wlog/sneer.jpg

    --
    The term "fire" brings up visions of violence and mayhem and the ugly scene
    of shooting employees who make mistakes. We will now refer to this process
    as "deleting" an employee (much as a file is deleted from a disk). The
    employee is simply there one instant, and gone the next. All the terrible
    temper tantrums, crying, and threats are eliminated.
    -- Kenny's Korner

  4. Re: [News] Many New Products from Debt-approaching Microsoft: Intellectual Monopolies

    On 2008-09-29, Hadron wrote:
    > "Phil Da Lick!" writes:
    >
    >> Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:
    >>> On Sun, 28 Sep 2008 22:21:01 +0100, Phil Da Lick! wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:
    >>>>> So why should a compnay that did not spend a dime on research profit by
    >>>>> being able to manufacture and sell the same product?
    >>>> Taking a product with a a complete roadmap to market certainly does
    >>>> not cost zero and you know better than that.
    >>>
    >>> But it still cost a hell of a lot less than the R&D the original company
    >>> had to lay out.
    >>> Also you negate the fact that the original company has to design a roadmap,
    >>> marketing plan, packageing etc as well.
    >>>
    >>> So I ask again, why should one company design the product and others can
    >>> sell it as well without having foot the bill for the R&D?

    >>
    >>
    >> That's the way the world works. As I've said before, it's not perfect
    >> but its betetr than communism. You meantion cheap chinese knockoffs in

    >
    > You are insane.
    >
    > You are equating protecting someones R&D with communism!


    ....not the R&D, the associated monopoly.

    That's an important distinction here.

    Not only are you claiming ownership of your own work but you are
    also claiming ownership of everyone else's work. That is FAR more
    like communism that capitalism. The people that wrote our original
    legal language on the matter understood this.

    That nasty bit of government interference will stiffle innovation
    in the area of interest until the patent expires.

    It's like taking all the FUD about the GPL and make it true.

    >
    > You ignorant prick. Go read this:
    >
    > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McCarthyism
    >



    --
    NO! There are no CODICILES of Fight Club! |||
    / | \
    That way leads to lawyers and business megacorps and credit cards!

    Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
    ----------------------------------------------------------
    http://www.usenet.com

  5. Re: [News] Many New Products from Debt-approaching Microsoft: IntellectualMonopolies

    JEDIDIAH wrote:
    > On 2008-09-29, Hadron wrote:
    >> You are equating protecting someones R&D with communism!

    >
    > ...not the R&D, the associated monopoly.
    >
    > That's an important distinction here.
    >
    > Not only are you claiming ownership of your own work but you are
    > also claiming ownership of everyone else's work. That is FAR more
    > like communism that capitalism. The people that wrote our original
    > legal language on the matter understood this.
    >
    > That nasty bit of government interference will stiffle innovation
    > in the area of interest until the patent expires.
    >
    > It's like taking all the FUD about the GPL and make it true.



    Precisely. People interested only in their short term gain and **** the
    rest of the world can never understand this.

  6. Re: [News] Many New Products from Debt-approaching Microsoft: Intellectual Monopolies

    Phil Da Lick! wrote:

    > People interested only in their short term gain and **** the
    > rest of the world


    Yeah, I can't stand those freaking right-wingers.

    Oops. Wrong group. 8)


  7. Re: [News] Many New Products from Debt-approaching Microsoft: IntellectualMonopolies

    chrisv wrote:
    > Phil Da Lick! wrote:
    >
    >> People interested only in their short term gain and **** the
    >> rest of the world

    >
    > Yeah, I can't stand those freaking right-wingers.
    >
    > Oops. Wrong group. 8)
    >


    lol

  8. Re: [News] Many New Products from Debt-approaching Microsoft: Intellectual Monopolies

    On Mon, 29 Sep 2008 09:14:57 +0100, Phil Da Lick! wrote:

    > Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:
    >> On Sun, 28 Sep 2008 22:21:01 +0100, Phil Da Lick! wrote:
    >>
    >>> Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:
    >>>> So why should a compnay that did not spend a dime on research profit by
    >>>> being able to manufacture and sell the same product?
    >>> Taking a product with a a complete roadmap to market certainly does not
    >>> cost zero and you know better than that.

    >>
    >> But it still cost a hell of a lot less than the R&D the original company
    >> had to lay out.
    >> Also you negate the fact that the original company has to design a roadmap,
    >> marketing plan, packageing etc as well.
    >>
    >> So I ask again, why should one company design the product and others can
    >> sell it as well without having foot the bill for the R&D?

    >
    >
    > That's the way the world works. As I've said before, it's not perfect
    > but its betetr than communism. You meantion cheap chinese knockoffs in
    > another post in this thread yet I don't notice a clamour by govts of the
    > west to protect their markets against these things. I wonder why that is.


    They try but they can't effectively do it.


    --
    Moshe Goldfarb
    Collector of soaps from around the globe.
    Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
    http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/
    Please Visit www.linsux.org

  9. Re: [News] Many New Products from Debt-approaching Microsoft: IntellectualMonopolies

    Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:
    > On Mon, 29 Sep 2008 09:14:57 +0100, Phil Da Lick! wrote:
    >
    >> Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:
    >>> On Sun, 28 Sep 2008 22:21:01 +0100, Phil Da Lick! wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:
    >>>>> So why should a compnay that did not spend a dime on research profit by
    >>>>> being able to manufacture and sell the same product?
    >>>> Taking a product with a a complete roadmap to market certainly does not
    >>>> cost zero and you know better than that.
    >>> But it still cost a hell of a lot less than the R&D the original company
    >>> had to lay out.
    >>> Also you negate the fact that the original company has to design a roadmap,
    >>> marketing plan, packageing etc as well.
    >>>
    >>> So I ask again, why should one company design the product and others can
    >>> sell it as well without having foot the bill for the R&D?

    >>
    >> That's the way the world works. As I've said before, it's not perfect
    >> but its betetr than communism. You meantion cheap chinese knockoffs in
    >> another post in this thread yet I don't notice a clamour by govts of the
    >> west to protect their markets against these things. I wonder why that is.

    >
    > They try but they can't effectively do it.


    Thats bollocks. The *won't* do it because they know full well that
    protectionism does not work.

  10. Re: [News] Many New Products from Debt-approaching Microsoft: Intellectual Monopolies

    On Tue, 30 Sep 2008 09:15:00 +0100, Phil Da Lick! wrote:

    > Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:
    >> On Mon, 29 Sep 2008 09:14:57 +0100, Phil Da Lick! wrote:
    >>
    >>> Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:
    >>>> On Sun, 28 Sep 2008 22:21:01 +0100, Phil Da Lick! wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>> Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:
    >>>>>> So why should a compnay that did not spend a dime on research profit by
    >>>>>> being able to manufacture and sell the same product?
    >>>>> Taking a product with a a complete roadmap to market certainly does not
    >>>>> cost zero and you know better than that.
    >>>> But it still cost a hell of a lot less than the R&D the original company
    >>>> had to lay out.
    >>>> Also you negate the fact that the original company has to design a roadmap,
    >>>> marketing plan, packageing etc as well.
    >>>>
    >>>> So I ask again, why should one company design the product and others can
    >>>> sell it as well without having foot the bill for the R&D?
    >>>
    >>> That's the way the world works. As I've said before, it's not perfect
    >>> but its betetr than communism. You meantion cheap chinese knockoffs in
    >>> another post in this thread yet I don't notice a clamour by govts of the
    >>> west to protect their markets against these things. I wonder why that is.

    >>
    >> They try but they can't effectively do it.

    >
    > Thats bollocks. The *won't* do it because they know full well that
    > protectionism does not work.


    You're going loony on me now.

    In NYC they regularly have the FBI shutting down the knock-off operations.
    Everything from Rolex watches to medical equipment.

    They just can't catch them all, and in fact they don't even come close.

    --
    Moshe Goldfarb
    Collector of soaps from around the globe.
    Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
    http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/
    Please Visit www.linsux.org

  11. Re: [News] Many New Products from Debt-approaching Microsoft: Intellectual Monopolies

    "Moshe Goldfarb." writes:

    > On Tue, 30 Sep 2008 09:15:00 +0100, Phil Da Lick! wrote:
    >
    >> Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:
    >>> On Mon, 29 Sep 2008 09:14:57 +0100, Phil Da Lick! wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:
    >>>>> On Sun, 28 Sep 2008 22:21:01 +0100, Phil Da Lick! wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>> Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:
    >>>>>>> So why should a compnay that did not spend a dime on research profit by
    >>>>>>> being able to manufacture and sell the same product?
    >>>>>> Taking a product with a a complete roadmap to market certainly does not
    >>>>>> cost zero and you know better than that.
    >>>>> But it still cost a hell of a lot less than the R&D the original company
    >>>>> had to lay out.
    >>>>> Also you negate the fact that the original company has to design a roadmap,
    >>>>> marketing plan, packageing etc as well.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> So I ask again, why should one company design the product and others can
    >>>>> sell it as well without having foot the bill for the R&D?
    >>>>
    >>>> That's the way the world works. As I've said before, it's not perfect
    >>>> but its betetr than communism. You meantion cheap chinese knockoffs in
    >>>> another post in this thread yet I don't notice a clamour by govts of the
    >>>> west to protect their markets against these things. I wonder why that is.
    >>>
    >>> They try but they can't effectively do it.

    >>
    >> Thats bollocks. The *won't* do it because they know full well that
    >> protectionism does not work.

    >
    > You're going loony on me now.


    This will be another case where, in the near future, you will shake your
    head and say "I'm sorry to say, but Hadron had you marked for what you
    are a while ago. I tried to give you the benefit of the doubt".

    He is a loony. A religious zealot with zero knowledge of the real world
    of the costs involved in developing idea to the point they can go to
    market.

    > In NYC they regularly have the FBI shutting down the knock-off operations.
    > Everything from Rolex watches to medical equipment.
    >
    > They just can't catch them all, and in fact they don't even come
    > close.


    Of course they do. But one not closed down is evidence of Phil Da 'Tard
    to think that thievery is ok.

    --
    "If only someone would kill you two. Literally."
    -- Tattoo Vampire in comp.os.linux.advocacy

  12. Re: [News] Many New Products from Debt-approaching Microsoft: Intellectual Monopolies

    On Tue, 30 Sep 2008 19:36:32 +0200, Hadron wrote:

    > "Moshe Goldfarb." writes:
    >
    >> On Tue, 30 Sep 2008 09:15:00 +0100, Phil Da Lick! wrote:
    >>
    >>> Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:
    >>>> On Mon, 29 Sep 2008 09:14:57 +0100, Phil Da Lick! wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>> Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:
    >>>>>> On Sun, 28 Sep 2008 22:21:01 +0100, Phil Da Lick! wrote:
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>> Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:
    >>>>>>>> So why should a compnay that did not spend a dime on research profit by
    >>>>>>>> being able to manufacture and sell the same product?
    >>>>>>> Taking a product with a a complete roadmap to market certainly does not
    >>>>>>> cost zero and you know better than that.
    >>>>>> But it still cost a hell of a lot less than the R&D the original company
    >>>>>> had to lay out.
    >>>>>> Also you negate the fact that the original company has to design a roadmap,
    >>>>>> marketing plan, packageing etc as well.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> So I ask again, why should one company design the product and others can
    >>>>>> sell it as well without having foot the bill for the R&D?
    >>>>>
    >>>>> That's the way the world works. As I've said before, it's not perfect
    >>>>> but its betetr than communism. You meantion cheap chinese knockoffs in
    >>>>> another post in this thread yet I don't notice a clamour by govts of the
    >>>>> west to protect their markets against these things. I wonder why that is.
    >>>>
    >>>> They try but they can't effectively do it.
    >>>
    >>> Thats bollocks. The *won't* do it because they know full well that
    >>> protectionism does not work.

    >>
    >> You're going loony on me now.

    >
    > This will be another case where, in the near future, you will shake your
    > head and say "I'm sorry to say, but Hadron had you marked for what you
    > are a while ago. I tried to give you the benefit of the doubt".
    >
    > He is a loony. A religious zealot with zero knowledge of the real world
    > of the costs involved in developing idea to the point they can go to
    > market.
    >
    >> In NYC they regularly have the FBI shutting down the knock-off operations.
    >> Everything from Rolex watches to medical equipment.
    >>
    >> They just can't catch them all, and in fact they don't even come
    >> close.

    >
    > Of course they do. But one not closed down is evidence of Phil Da 'Tard
    > to think that thievery is ok.


    So it appears....
    I'm too trusting.

    --
    Moshe Goldfarb
    Collector of soaps from around the globe.
    Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
    http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/
    Please Visit www.linsux.org

  13. Re: [News] Many New Products from Debt-approaching Microsoft: IntellectualMonopolies

    Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:
    > On Tue, 30 Sep 2008 09:15:00 +0100, Phil Da Lick! wrote:
    >
    >> Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:
    >>> On Mon, 29 Sep 2008 09:14:57 +0100, Phil Da Lick! wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:
    >>>>> On Sun, 28 Sep 2008 22:21:01 +0100, Phil Da Lick! wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>> Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:
    >>>>>>> So why should a compnay that did not spend a dime on research profit by
    >>>>>>> being able to manufacture and sell the same product?
    >>>>>> Taking a product with a a complete roadmap to market certainly does not
    >>>>>> cost zero and you know better than that.
    >>>>> But it still cost a hell of a lot less than the R&D the original company
    >>>>> had to lay out.
    >>>>> Also you negate the fact that the original company has to design a roadmap,
    >>>>> marketing plan, packageing etc as well.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> So I ask again, why should one company design the product and others can
    >>>>> sell it as well without having foot the bill for the R&D?
    >>>> That's the way the world works. As I've said before, it's not perfect
    >>>> but its betetr than communism. You meantion cheap chinese knockoffs in
    >>>> another post in this thread yet I don't notice a clamour by govts of the
    >>>> west to protect their markets against these things. I wonder why that is.
    >>> They try but they can't effectively do it.

    >> Thats bollocks. The *won't* do it because they know full well that
    >> protectionism does not work.

    >
    > You're going loony on me now.
    >
    > In NYC they regularly have the FBI shutting down the knock-off operations.
    > Everything from Rolex watches to medical equipment.
    >
    > They just can't catch them all, and in fact they don't even come close.


    They could deal with them all by imposing trade sanctions and tariffs
    was the point I was making. Fact is they don't. They don't here in
    England either. And you can shut as many down individually as you want,
    three more will spring up to take its place.

  14. Re: [News] Many New Products from Debt-approaching Microsoft: IntellectualMonopolies

    Hadron wrote:
    > He is a loony. A religious zealot with zero knowledge of the real world
    > of the costs involved in developing idea to the point they can go to
    > market.



    Says a usenet troll.

  15. Re: [News] Many New Products from Debt-approaching Microsoft: Intellectual Monopolies

    On Wed, 01 Oct 2008 09:19:13 +0100, Phil Da Lick! wrote:

    > Hadron wrote:
    >> He is a loony. A religious zealot with zero knowledge of the real world
    >> of the costs involved in developing idea to the point they can go to
    >> market.

    >
    >
    > Says a usenet troll.


    And M$ zealot.

    --
    "If it weren't for Windows, you wouldn't
    be posting anything right now."
    DFS - comp.os.linux.advocacy
    Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2004



  16. Re: [News] Many New Products from Debt-approaching Microsoft: IntellectualMonopolies

    William Poaster wrote:
    > On Wed, 01 Oct 2008 09:19:13 +0100, Phil Da Lick! wrote:
    >
    >> Hadron wrote:
    >>> He is a loony. A religious zealot with zero knowledge of the real world
    >>> of the costs involved in developing idea to the point they can go to
    >>> market.

    >>
    >> Says a usenet troll.

    >
    > And M$ zealot.
    >


    Less a religion, and more an enslavement.

  17. Re: [News] Many New Products from Debt-approaching Microsoft: Intellectual Monopolies

    "Phil Da Lick!" writes:

    > Hadron wrote:
    >> He is a loony. A religious zealot with zero knowledge of the real world
    >> of the costs involved in developing idea to the point they can go to
    >> market.

    >
    >
    > Says a usenet troll.


    How original. In true High Plains Hypocrite form you snipped all the
    supporting facts.


    Face it Phil, you know nothing about the costs involved in R&D. Nothing.


    --
    ">So how do we destroy Microsoft?

    Microsoft is doing the job quite nicely, imploding under its own weight."
    -- AZ Nomad in comp.os.linux.advocacy

  18. Re: [News] Many New Products from Debt-approaching Microsoft: IntellectualMonopolies

    Hadron wrote:
    > "Phil Da Lick!" writes:
    >
    >> Hadron wrote:
    >>> He is a loony. A religious zealot with zero knowledge of the real world
    >>> of the costs involved in developing idea to the point they can go to
    >>> market.

    >>
    >> Says a usenet troll.

    >
    > How original. In true High Plains Hypocrite form you snipped all the
    > supporting facts.
    >
    >
    > Face it Phil, you know nothing about the costs involved in R&D. Nothing.
    >
    >


    And you, "True Linux Advocate" know nothings about the principles of
    freedom or straightforward market economics.

  19. Re: [News] Many New Products from Debt-approaching Microsoft: IntellectualMonopolies

    Hadron wrote:
    > Face it Phil, you know nothing about the costs involved in R&D. Nothing.



    Oh and for the record this is utter bull****. As usual. I've been in
    charge of software R&D at our place for 15 years now, and we've spent
    thousands on our software. I don't hole myself up in a bunker and yell
    "you can't come and plaaaaay!" at the tope of my voice when competition
    rears its head, I welcome it. Keeping up/ahead makes our product line
    stronger. And in years to come when we wind up our business if we didn't
    do as well as hoped on the software side I certainly won't whine like a
    scaredy-cat bitch at those evil competitiors, I'll blame myself for not
    making our stuff better.

  20. Re: [News] Many New Products from Debt-approaching Microsoft: Intellectual Monopolies

    > Quack snotted:
    >>
    >>Face it Phil,


    Face it, Quack. You're a dumb**** and you make a jackass of yourself
    on a regular basis, so you've got no right to talk about anyone else.

    --
    "choice : for the brain dead." - "True Linux advocate" Hadron Quark

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2