Recent Comments:
Amazon, Microsoft and Yahoo unite against Google Books {Engadget}
Aug 21st 2009 9:45AM Neither Google nor the OBA nor the publishers give a rat's ass about the authors. The ONLY reason this agreement with Google exists at all is that Google was sued after they tried to cut everyone except Google out of the loop regarding electronic scanning and publishing of books. If Google had what they originally wanted, ALL books would have been available for free. And, while I'm sure some dimwits would like to see that happen, that would effectively remove all incentive for writers to write. I don't doubt for a second that Google would still like to go back to their original plans.
Google -- you're becoming evil.
Paul Sr. demonstrates OCC's electric chopper, Fox News seems mystified {Engadget}
Aug 14th 2009 3:26PM The questions they asked were all legitimate and all questions that any newsperson would have asked, such as, "Isn't this everything you're against. Aren't you about a loud engine....". Very legitimate questions that should have occurred to anyone with a brain.
So, someone at Engadget doesn't like Fox News, eh?
Windows 7 review {Engadget}
Aug 12th 2009 2:42PM So, if I make changes to my PC (adding RAM, bigger HD, new graphics card, new router, etc), will Windows 7 stop working until I call India and beg and plead with them that, no, I didn't steal it and could they please, oh pretty please, revalidate it for me? I stopped using Windows at Vista for that exact reason. And yes, the minor updates I listed above caused Vista to freak out.
What Microsoft didn't understand then is that they think they are preventing me from buying Windows once and then never buying again by using my one copy and then continually changing PCs. On my side of the table, however, what I see is that Microsoft is preventing me from accessing my data. And my data is more important (to me) than any OS. I use the Mac now because of this. If Apple does the same thing, I'll switch to Linux in a heartbeat.
So, Microsoft, are you still going to hold people's data hostage? If so, you will never see me again.
Garmin 7x5 series devices bricked by firmware update? {Engadget}
Jun 23rd 2009 3:27PM Speaking of Garmin GPSsesses, does anyone happen to know whether any of the other (non-Garmin) GPS units work in Northwestern Montana? Garmin's street maps (including the 2010 versions) are brain-dead. So are Google's for that matter. MapQuest maps are accurate, but don't exist on my GPS. :(
Sprint's Dan Hesse: Verizon needs to "check its facts" on Pre exclusivity {Engadget}
Jun 5th 2009 11:36AM "Sprint had already officially refuted Verizon's claim that it'd get its own Pre in "about six months" by saying that the deal lasted through 2009..."
Errr....it's June. "through 2009" is more or less "about six months".
Motorola debuts world's first retail DOCSIS 3.0 cable modems {Engadget}
Jun 2nd 2009 11:27PM They rent you one. Usually for $3-$5 per month.
Laptop Hunters part five: same schtick, different Lauren {Engadget}
May 14th 2009 9:35PM What's sad is that girl is so hot now, but she's eventually going to turn into her blob of a mother.
Dream Cheeky's USS Enterprise webcam exudes charm and class {Engadget}
Apr 12th 2009 4:28AM Giving yourself an "oh snap" is just...sad.
Monster Cable learns nothing, sues Monster Transmission {Engadget}
Apr 9th 2009 4:49PM matt,
Monster has a LOT of trademarks - and most of them have NOTHING to do with cables. That's why they think they're in the right. But, the thing is, they can't do that. You can't just obtain a trademark for a product category and not produce any products in that category. It's time for someone to lay the smack down on this company.
Monster Cable learns nothing, sues Monster Transmission {Engadget}
Apr 9th 2009 4:43PM Gadgetfreak, your lack of knowledge of the law in the area pretty much shows you to be the chief legal goon for Monster Cable. As someone already stated, you're confusing trademark law with copyright law.
Beyond that stupid gaff though, Monster Cable is on VERY thin ice here. Pretty much none of the companies they are suing or have sued has ANYTHING to do with making cables. There is zero confusion in the marketplace about this - and that's the only way Monster Cable will win in court.
Monster, however, gets legally slimy by attempting to trademark any and everything under the sun for use with the name Monster. So, they can say since they have a specific trademark for use of "Monster" in relation to, say, golf, they can sue a miniature golf company. The problem with that is that, in order for a trademark to become and remain valid, you have to actually produce goods for which your trademark was granted. You can't just obtain a trademark and not use it by slapping it on a product - which is EXACTLY what Monster Cable is trying to do.
As soon as someone grows a pair and doesn't mind spending a few bucks, they should be able to slap Monster back to the stone ages and have all their illegitimate trademarks rescinded.
