The difference is in convenience.

On the one hand, you can add a page to your bookmarks, after choosing the correct folder, of course.

On the other hand, you can click a button and a page gets automatically saved in your “read later” storage, with a description, summary, and a preview of the content.

On Firefox? I’ve used it for years and this is the first time I hear of Pocket

And then people get all pissy when Google or Microsoft show a pop-up of a new feature…

You don’t need to stare directly into the ball of fire to determine where the Sun is. All you need is the flashes of light through the leaves - and you CAN see that in the jungle.

How the heck do you find north based on your watch?

Like this

I live in north Manchester so I know Manchester is south

What if you go on a trip to Thailand and get turned around in the jungle?

Or I can look at the sun if not midday and figure it out

That gives you a very approximate direction.

You’re talking nonsense, is what you’re talking about.

What does a genre drying up have to do with IP or copyright? Like, are you even reading your own words?

Strangling out smaller studios any way possible

Supergiant Games, CDPR, Larian, Sandfall Interactive and every single indie creator out there clearly haven’t been informed of how horrible their situation is. Maybe you should contact them and let them know that the 10/10 games they’ve been making are impossible to make due to copyright and IP protection laws?

Eh it’s all just stolen and borrowed code

Got proof? Go and win the easiest lawsuit of your life.

They’re not talking about “wage”, they’re talking about “value”. I’m assuming “purchasing power”.

Not how that works

It’s exactly how it works. You can patent the code, the solution, the material, whatever the fuck you want. That’s what a patent IS.

You keep switching between moral and legal arguments. They are not the same.

Oh, do elaborate!

Deflection

Example of a similar thought-process.

Strawman

Huh? That wasn’t an argument, mate, that was an assumption and a question. Are you OK?

I still kinda’ hope I’d get an answer, though.

Literally mirroring your words back at you

Well, not “literally” and not quite “mirroring”. I think you need some rest, mate, you seem tired and unfocused.

Does a patent protect the concept or the specific code?

Depends on the patent.

according to your definition of theft I’m 100% certain that’s the case

It’s not “my definition of theft”, it’s “theft”. If you’re 100% certain, hit Amazon lawyers up, I’m sure they’ll love to talk to you about it - it’s literally free money for them and maybe a big payout for you, right?

Thanks to those, or in spite of? You are focusing on outliers and expecting that to be a convincing argument to describe the typical.

The hilarious thing is that you’re like so many other “revolutionaries” who come in and go: “oh no, the X rules are stifling the market/competition/free exchange of information/whatever” while being completely ignorant on how these rules came to be.

It’s like these capitalists of today saying that OSHA needs to go because they’re losing profits to it, completely oblivious to the fact that it was the capitalists of the XIX century who created them to increase profits (because having to replace skilled labourers became a high cost factor).

You strike me as someone who thinks that copyright and other IP protection laws are something that was set up in XX (maybe XIX) century as a means to protect the wealthy. Am I wrong?

Fair, I was attempting to limit scope with only discussing patents

Right. So when I refused to change the scope, you decided to call me an idiot. How very gentlemanly of you.

Microsoft did copy and paste though: Yammer, Bing and Azure respectively

So, you fully and honestly believe that Microsoft has stolen Google’s and Amazon’s code? As in: you’re 100% certain that’s the case here?

Also worth mentioning the duopoly nature of those 2 specifically.

No. It’s not worth mentioning in a topic that has nothing to do with that fact…

Rather telling that all your examples are Fortune 500 companies?

It amazes me how you see a company NOW being a Fortune 500, and going “waagh, IP protection only serves the massive corpos!!!” without realising how many of those companies became Fortune 500 thanks to those protections.

It equally amazes me how you see the law being used by said companies most of the time (because, you know, they’re larger) and go “we can do without these laws” without blinking an eye, or a single neuron firing towards the thought that… these laws ALSO serve the smaller companies.

We’re not talking copyright laws, we’re talking patent laws

Mate, are you lost or something?

This is what my reply was to:

Copyright and patent laws need to die.

Do I need to put “copyright” in bold here?

Ffinally! It was shameful how Francis was dancing around the subject, trying REALLY HARD to not name russia as the invader.

Do you know why there doesn’t exist automated fencepost painters?

I’m just impressed that you managed to miss the point by so much.

Yes, because you just described what businesses throughout the Western world do to your mythical small business and projected it onto some mythical far east.

Correct. Which is precisely why copyright law was established in the first place and why companies like Facebook, Google or Amazon were able to become what they were without Microsoft or Apple just copy-pasting what they did.

The copyright laws are not perfect, far from it. But they give smaller companies SOME form of defence against the corps.

You do realize that is the point of IP right? To allow legalized theft in this exact manner?

Do you also believe that OSHA was created to control the poor employee into submission by their great corporate overlord?

In the exact article this comment chain is discussing palworld did their due diligence to verify they weren’t violating any of Nintendo’s IP and then Nintendo modified their patent filing so that they were with the express goal of stealing their product.

Yes, like I said: the copyright laws are not perfect. But saying that it would better WITHOUT ANY COPYRIGHT LAWS is insanity.

If it’s a perfect 1:1 copy why does it matter? Can you explain how this isn’t just a stance rooted in xenophobia?

First of all: very often it’s literally a 1:1 copy.

Secondly: imagine you make an innovative product. I don’t know, automatic fence painter, whatever. It sells well, but you don’t have the money to start a large-scale production, you’re doing OK with sales and are looking for investors, but things are fairly slow. In comes a Chinese dude, buys one auto-painter from you, brings it home, dismantles the thing, copies everything (potentially making some changes), and starts a massive-scale production in his factory. Due to the mass-production, worse materials, and lower labour costs, he sells the product at 20% the price of yours. The market is saturated with his knock-off, you’re left with zero money.

Is this xenophobia to you? Or someone stealing your product and killing your business?

The goal of the vast majority is to be acquired

Yeah, I’m not talking about them being acquired. What gave you that idea? I specifically used the words “steals their idea”.

I just wanna know which amazing video game innovations We are protecting here in America

First, I’m not talking specifically about America. Second, I’m not talking about “amazing innovations”. Copyright is also for trademarks, very characteristic gameplay mechanics, etc. For example, Playrix made “Fishdom” which was copy-paste Worms. Team17 won the case and protected their IP.

Are we talking about the failing franchises that have been milking their customers for 15 years?

Umm… No? What does that have to do with copyright or IP protection…?

Have we done anything really innovative recently?

Have you tried looking at titles from other publishers than Ubisoft, EA or Activition?

I don’t care where the company making the claim is from, as long as it acquired the IP legally and has a valid claim for protecting it.

The way the patent system works is bad in many, many, MANY ways, but saying “copyright and patent laws need to die” is just idiotic. As it is, we at least have a semblance of rules. Without it, it’s just “whoever can reproduce and mass produce a promising product faster”. And that means: China because they already make everything.

They favour the big guy, not the little guy

That’s the US law system, not the IP system in general.

There are examples of smaller companies managing to protect their IP (Finjan vs Symantec, Unwired Planet vs. Huawei, Neo Wireless vs. Sony, etc., etc - that’s just from a quick search).

I’m not saying that the copyright system in place is perfect, but saying “copyright and patent laws need to die” is just delusional.

WTF are you talking about??

How about you come back to me when you can read?

I’m not defending Nintendo, I’m saying that “copyright and patent laws need to die” stance is naive.

Chinese companies famously ignore patent law and do make copies and try to flood the western market with them.

But western companies at least have a tool to fight back or limit the flood.

Most startups don’t have the time and/or money to patent their ideas and big corps do squash them/steal their ideas routinely once they become noticeable.

Ah, the usual “if the solution is not absolutely 100% perfect, let’s throw out the solution”. Come on…

If anything, startups can’t develop their ideas because some company will hold a generic patent like “clicking a button does something” (or “glide with a pet”) from 30 years ago.

Yeah, this happens all of once every billion times. Clearly the system is stupid and needs to be killed so that nobody who isn’t extremely rich can actually develop anything new without being immediately put out to pasture.

Copyright and patent laws need to die.

This is such an extremely naive thing to say.

Do you enjoy having every good, innovative US or EU product die immediately due to China/India making a 1:1 copy and flooding the markets with it?

Enjoy innovative products that startups create? How about not having any of that because as soon as a startup makes something, a big corp comes in with their money, steals the idea, and floods the market?

EDIT: no arguments, just downvotes? Damn, I thought this place was supposed to be better than Reddit…