Send News. Want a reply? Read this. More in the FAQ.   News Forum - All Forums - Mobile - PDA - RSS Headlines  RSS Headlines   Twitter  Twitter
Customize
User Settings
Styles:
LAN Parties
Upcoming one-time events:

Regularly scheduled events

User information for Quboid

Real Name Quboid   
Search for:
 
Sort results:   Ascending Descending
Limit results:
 
 
 
Nickname Quboid
Email Concealed by request
ICQ None given.
Description I can't make any car pop a wheelie.
Homepage http://bcmedia.biz/
Signed On Jul 26, 2001, 01:42
Total Comments 4344 (Master)
User ID 10439
 
User comment history
< Newer [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 ] Older >


News Comments > Morning Legal Briefs
26. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Aug 7, 2014, 19:21 Quboid
 
I think the similarities in name, theme and appearance are such that combined, it seems unlikely that both came around independently. It's not impossible, but in my opinion it would be odd; evidently in your opinion it would not be.  
Avatar 10439
 
- Quboid
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Morning Legal Briefs
24. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Aug 7, 2014, 17:59 Quboid
 
Orogogus wrote on Aug 7, 2014, 17:33:
The shapes are completely different. Rovio's is a ball for throwing, and the other is thinner and elongated

This explains most of the points you make, Rovio adapted the design to fit their game. Take the first toy, adapt it to fit the theme of a catapult game, and bar a few minor cosmetic changes you've got the second toy.
 
Avatar 10439
 
- Quboid
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Morning Legal Briefs
5. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Aug 7, 2014, 16:57 Quboid
 
The claim isn't that the monkey owns it, that's just Gawker being Gawker. They've updated their article and headline to clarify that the argument is that the (human) photographer does not own the photo - there's no claim that the monkey does, which would indeed be stupid.  
Avatar 10439
 
- Quboid
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Morning Legal Briefs
22. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Aug 7, 2014, 16:38 Quboid
 
I don't know what else to say, I see resemblances in the designs on the page of the PDF that I linked to (*cough*proving I did at least skim it*cough*). They could come up with the name independently and they could come up with the design independently but both seems unlikely.

The fonts are similar but putting your angry cartoon character's product name in a high impact cartoon font isn't the most amazing idea and I can readily believe that they would come up with this independently if they had done the rest.

Proving this would be next to impossible if there isn't contract between Rovio and Hartz in the first place.
 
Avatar 10439
 
- Quboid
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Colin McRae Rally Steam Refunds
36. Re: Colin McRae Rally Steam Refunds Aug 7, 2014, 16:23 Quboid
 
I generally subscribe to Occam's Razor on these things but they are still doing it.

The marketing spiel makes sense for a mobile game, where "re-mastered" isn't expected to be true in the traditional sense, and for this marketing to then be badly ported over without appreciating the PC market's expectations.

The problem is that they're still implying that it's based on CMR2.0. They know that this is being misunderstood and they've added the bare minimum so they can claim it's not being mis-sold. By claiming this is CMR re-mastered for HD, I think they are still mis-selling because re-mastered doesn't mean "passing resemblance" in any other market. Mis-selling is about the only case in which Valve intervene so I wonder if they told Codemasters to sort it out before they had to.

If they weren't being dicks in the first place, they are now.
 
Avatar 10439
 
- Quboid
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Colin McRae Rally Steam Refunds
34. Re: Out of the Blue Aug 7, 2014, 09:51 Quboid
 
Rigs wrote on Aug 6, 2014, 23:36:
Quboid wrote on Aug 6, 2014, 22:49:
In your car dealership example, Burrito of Peace, if the dealer doesn't let you take a car for a test drive do you go ahead and take a 2 hour joyride?

Oh, come on now, you know damn well that's not what he meant.

Comparing physical goods to digital ones is always problematic but essentially yes - it looked to me like he was saying that if a demonstration isn't made available, breaking the law is fine as long as you only break it a little bit. I kind of agree, but a judge would not. I don't think pirating to get a demonstration version is particularly bad but to many (especially outside gaming) that looks like a feeble justification - and to some pirates, it is.

PHJF, is that sarcasm? It feels like sarcasm but doesn't really make sense as such.
 
Avatar 10439
 
- Quboid
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Colin McRae Rally Steam Refunds
28. Re: Colin McRae Rally Steam Refunds Aug 6, 2014, 22:49 Quboid
 
It was pretending to be Colin McRae Rally 2.0 "re-mastered for HD" and I wouldn't expect a cheap update of a 14 year old game to have high system requirements or to look especially good in videos. It was intentionally marketed as something that it clearly is not because (thanks to reviews and YouTubers) we know that it is a mobile game port and not CMR2.0 re-mastered, lacking everything that made that game great. They've added a note that the car and track lists are from the mobile game but it still repeatedly implies that it's principally based on CMR2.0.

I absolutely have sympathy for people who bought this. They should have researched their purchase more, sure, but it's a few bucks and making an impulse buy based on the product page isn't the craziest thing. A dishonest product page isn't justified in any scenario.

In your car dealership example, Burrito of Peace, if the dealer doesn't let you take a car for a test drive do you go ahead and take a 2 hour joyride?

This comment was edited on Aug 6, 2014, 22:55.
 
Avatar 10439
 
- Quboid
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Morning Legal Briefs
18. Re: Angry Birds Aug 6, 2014, 14:11 Quboid
 
It's strange that Rovio are licensing anything to Hartz. Did they independently come up with the same name and art direction and then somehow get the manufacturer of an existing toy of the same name and style to pay them to make toys with this name and style? That doesn't add up.

There must have been a deal between Rovio and Hartz at some point to buy or license AB from Hartz to Rovio, only for them to decide that there's a new market for toys and get together again to license AB back to Hartz.

If that's the case, then this suit would be to establish that she is the rightful owner of the IP, which would be needed to go after Rovio.
 
Avatar 10439
 
- Quboid
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Morning Legal Briefs
4. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Aug 6, 2014, 13:43 Quboid
 
Dear Randy Queen,
There are people and animals suffering and dying in the world, and real human rights issues in certain countries, and this is what you take issue with? Criticism of nearly two decade old art? I think there are greater causes to champion with the limited time and energy we are given on this Earth.

Yours,
Mr. Randy Queen's Logic
 
Avatar 10439
 
- Quboid
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Out of the Blue
6. Re: Out of the Blue Aug 6, 2014, 10:41 Quboid
 
OUTRAGEOUS!  
Avatar 10439
 
- Quboid
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > July Steam Hardware & Software Survey
3. Re: July Steam Hardware & Software Survey Aug 6, 2014, 10:33 Quboid
 
I switched by my own free will, it's the best version of Windows.  
Avatar 10439
 
- Quboid
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > The Expendabros
11. Re: The Expendabros Aug 6, 2014, 09:32 Quboid
 
NetHead wrote on Aug 6, 2014, 09:06:
Quboid wrote on Aug 6, 2014, 08:56:
They presumably got money as part of The Expendables 3 marketing campaign...

I seriously doubt that, their stuff is a typical example of how to get away with using another's property without having to pay, be licensed, or have any kind of permission.

What's better than not having to pay? Getting paid!

I would think that this is going beyond fair use/parody. Anyway, why make it at all if there was no money? It's an elaborate looking demo if that's all it is.


Edit: Also, Expendables 3 is plastered all over its Steam page ...
 
Avatar 10439
 
- Quboid
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > SimCity Trial Version
8. Re: SimCity Trial Version Aug 6, 2014, 09:07 Quboid
 
Flatline wrote on Aug 5, 2014, 19:49:
Creston wrote on Aug 5, 2014, 18:23:
Makes sense it's only for four hours, because you can't build anything big enough (relatively speaking, in their tiny-ass lots) to see how fucking terrible it is later in the game.

I almost bought the game when it was on sale for 20 bucks. But then I decided that I'd be better of spending that money on something more worthwhile. Glad it hear it's not even particularly worth 4 hours of my time.

When you've played it enough to know what you're doing you can effectively finish a city in 4 hours, from laying the first tarmac until the simulation engine starts to struggle (at about 50K population, and that's after it fudges the numbers).

I re-bought SimCity 4 on a recent Steam sale and it's just so much better in almost every way.
 
Avatar 10439
 
- Quboid
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > The Expendabros
9. Re: The Expendabros Aug 6, 2014, 08:56 Quboid
 
Xero wrote on Aug 6, 2014, 08:04:
I have no problem with them giving away a free game, HOWEVER, the original BROFORCE title still claims to be in I believe ALPHA when I load it up. So instead of finishing up their original title, they are working on giving away a freebie? WTF.

They presumably got money as part of The Expendables 3 marketing campaign. Why would they work for free on Broforce when paid work comes up?

Why yes, I do think Early Access is deeply flawed. How'd ya guess?
 
Avatar 10439
 
- Quboid
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Morning Legal Briefs
10. Re: Angry Birds Aug 5, 2014, 16:44 Quboid
 
Sepharo wrote on Aug 5, 2014, 15:32:
Points 34-36 is where she loses her case though. The entire document talks about how she has the rights to "Angry Birds" for pet toys and that Hartz was just licensing and managing it for her... But then Amendment 1 to the agreement lets them take it over. The only argument refuting that is that no “good and valuable consideration” was provided to her... But she signed it.

If she signed over ownership in exchange for something that she didn't get, then she has every right to expect ownership back. I'd like to know what "good and valuable consideration" means in this case and if it implies she signed the rights over without explicitly asking for anything. IANAL but as I understand it, even if she did sign it away for nothing she may still have a case that without some form of payment, the contract is invalid.

Orogogus wrote on Aug 5, 2014, 15:19:
I feel like I'm looking at something different from everyone else. I mean, they're both red, and they have big eyes, and... that's it? The wings, tail, shape of beak, legs or lack thereof, secondary coloration all look dissimilar to me. Is there, like, a whole set of these things in the same color schemes as the other birds?

It's not the precise toy that's a copy, it's the IP - it's the same concept and the same name.
 
Avatar 10439
 
- Quboid
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Morning Legal Briefs
7. Re: Angry Birds Aug 5, 2014, 14:56 Quboid
 
Creston wrote on Aug 5, 2014, 14:06:
At first glance I thought "oh right, here's someone else who invented the iPhone and needs millions of dollars for their stolen intellectual property."

Reading the actual court filing, though... Holy shit. Page 8 and 9 of the filing show pictures of the toy they originally made, along with the back of the packaging that specifically mentions, BY NAME, that she's the one who designed it, and it's being used under license.

I'm guessing Hart and/or Rovio are going to have to cough up a metric shitload of money over this. How much has Rovio made off angry birds? Hundreds of millions of dollars?

By their nature these are only one side of the story ...

... but it really looks like Hartz screwed over her and probably Rovio (who I presume had no reason to think that Hartz didn't own the I.P. in the first place). This isn't just some idiot who thought up a name or a gameplay mechanic and thinks they're entitled to a cut when someone else thinks of the same thing and makes money.

The comparison on page 13 is the most blatant. There's just no way that happened independently even if Hartz didn't have their fingers in both.
 
Avatar 10439
 
- Quboid
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Game Reviews
4. Re: Game Reviews Aug 5, 2014, 13:03 Quboid
 
Guidelines are common in pool/snooker games but they're always optional and very much for newbies - it's like ten pin bowling with bumpers blocking the gutters.

The review says "Shots are telegraphed (on lower difficulties, at least) with the line which both target ball and cue ball will follow after being struck" which implies that they're optional, and that the reviewer didn't spend very long with the game.
 
Avatar 10439
 
- Quboid
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Saturday Mobilization
17. Re: Saturday Mobilization Aug 4, 2014, 13:13 Quboid
 
Politicians aren't going to waste their time watching cops' videos. In the UK, it would be the Independent Police Complaints Commission's job and they'd have people who have a clue check it, probably an ex-cop.  
Avatar 10439
 
- Quboid
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Saturday Mobilization
12. Re: Saturday Mobilization Aug 3, 2014, 09:21 Quboid
 
xXBatmanXx wrote on Aug 3, 2014, 08:33:
I really don't want them, I know the Minneapolis PD is going to try them out. Burnsville PD I believe has them, or they tried them out at one time. Here's the thing, I am recorded whenever I drive my car, for all traffic stops, and any interactions near my car.

It never once has helped me even though the evidence is right there and obvious.

How many cameras are you going to have? How good is the audio pickup? They can't see what a human sees and they can't hear what a human can hear.

People always want to record me at traffic stops, and that is fine. I tell them the department I work for, my name, my badge number, that they are also being recorded, and all information I just gave them will be at the bottom of their citation.

It is at an infant stage. Will it make cops act better? No. Will it make the public act better? No.

My questions is - what do you want this to accomplish?

The city or state puts a camera up somewhere and everyone cries about privacy, yet everyone wants to put a camera and mic on a cop and record everything we do.

When someone makes a mistake wearing this - are they going to also go back and play the 10,000,000 good things that person did along with that one mistake or comment?

Thanks Batman!

With regards to privacy: the difference is that if a police officer is present, my privacy is already gone. A camera on a street corner is another eye on me, a camera on a cop isn't. It's the officer's privacy which I don't have an answer for - it doesn't seem right to record everything they do even if a higher level of vigilance is warranted (as in, IMHO the police must be policed most).

I appreciate it would be limited in what it picks up. The sound and actions of someone close and in front of the cop is all I would expect, the person or persons who the officer is talking to.

Will people go back and look at past behaviour? No more or less than they do now, which is to say generally not but of the officer is accused of being a loose cannon then he or she would have 10,000,000 examples to the contrary.

I don't think the game-controller example would be a problem. In fact, I think the video would help as it may show that the cop had virtual zero time and that the other guy was an idiot. Some Internet sleuths would get it wrong but no one of any consequence - thankfully the sort of idiots that do this don't matter and I wouldn't let such numpties derail a good idea. Plenty of people would see the video and think "wow, that guy does get something gun-like out of their pocket. What an utter, utter moron!". Just don't put Reddit in charge of Internal Affairs.

The big question, and what I want this to accomplish is: how does this make people behave? You say no difference but the trials suggest otherwise. An 88% reduction in complaints seems like a big deal, albeit from a small sample, which I suspect is mostly down to potential perpetrators not trying to get out of trouble by getting the cop into it.
 
Avatar 10439
 
- Quboid
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Saturday Mobilization
6. Re: Saturday Mobilization Aug 2, 2014, 21:02 Quboid
 
I have heard anecdotally that plenty of cops who have taken part in trials of on-body cameras have been very keen on it. Also (source):
Police officers in Rialto, California, were issued with video cameras. Last month they reported an 88% reduction in complaints filed against officers and a 60% fall in incidents where officers used force.

Are these drops because the cops behave better or because people don't try to lie? I suspect it's heavily the later, as the anecdotal evidence suggests. Cops get plenty of stick and some deserve it but I assume the average cop is just someone making ends meet who doesn't want hassle, doesn't want to get hurt, doesn't want to get fired and ideally would maybe make a bit of a difference - i.e. a human being.

Batman, do you have any experience of this sort of thing? (Cameras on cops, not being a human being.)
 
Avatar 10439
 
- Quboid
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
4344 Comments. 218 pages. Viewing page 7.
< Newer [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 ] Older >


footer

Blue's News logo