Y2HH Posted December 19, 2012 Share Posted December 19, 2012 QUOTE (bmags @ Dec 19, 2012 -> 09:13 AM) How much money could someone honestly make selling instagram photos to ad companies. That sounds like the dumbest business model i've ever heard. Probably not much, but who knows...I think the TOS may have been written improperly, because Instagram backtracked and said it was never their intention to sell anybody's photos. I think it's more likely they wanted very loose customer agreements in place for their own protection, and didn't realize it went a bit too far. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2HH Posted December 19, 2012 Share Posted December 19, 2012 Kodak just sold it's patent portfolio to Apple and Google (together who paid 525M for it). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmags Posted December 19, 2012 Share Posted December 19, 2012 I guarantee it was written improperly, and that's probably a good thing. They probably gave this to their lawyers asking for what they wanted to accomplish (sponsored links, ads for instagram, etc), and the lawyers put in language that broadly gave this powers. But they probably did not consider how this read to regular customers. I think by and large these TOS freakouts are good for consumers, it brings awareness on customers to read TOS and pressure companies, and it will likely lead to companies writing simpler TOS or blog analysis of their TOS so people can understand. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmags Posted December 19, 2012 Share Posted December 19, 2012 QUOTE (Y2HH @ Dec 19, 2012 -> 03:28 PM) Kodak just sold it's patent portfolio to Apple and Google (together who paid 525M for it). Wouldn't it be great, if instead of that money going to a bankrupt company's lawyers, that money was spent developing new products that benefit future consumers? No? Oh, right, our IP system is working wonderfully. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2HH Posted December 19, 2012 Share Posted December 19, 2012 QUOTE (bmags @ Dec 19, 2012 -> 09:54 AM) Wouldn't it be great, if instead of that money going to a bankrupt company's lawyers, that money was spent developing new products that benefit future consumers? No? Oh, right, our IP system is working wonderfully. Heh, you won't get an argument from me about our IP system being broken...it's pretty severe. But this is what happens when the laws of your country are written for lawyers by lawyers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeSox Posted December 19, 2012 Share Posted December 19, 2012 The Disney Extension for copyright is coming up again soon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamshack Posted December 19, 2012 Author Share Posted December 19, 2012 QUOTE (bmags @ Dec 19, 2012 -> 09:54 AM) Wouldn't it be great, if instead of that money going to a bankrupt company's lawyers, that money was spent developing new products that benefit future consumers? No? Oh, right, our IP system is working wonderfully. In return, it will receive $525 million, something Kodak CEO Antonio Perez says will let the company "repay a substantial amount of our initial [bankruptcy financing] loan, satisfy a key condition for our new financing facility, and position our Commercial Imaging business for further growth and success." link Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RockRaines Posted December 19, 2012 Share Posted December 19, 2012 QUOTE (Y2HH @ Dec 19, 2012 -> 09:20 AM) Probably not much, but who knows...I think the TOS may have been written improperly, because Instagram backtracked and said it was never their intention to sell anybody's photos. I think it's more likely they wanted very loose customer agreements in place for their own protection, and didn't realize it went a bit too far. It's standard T's and C's for any hosting company. It either goes one way, the customer owns all of the data stored and hosted or the hosting company claims that as property. For most enterprise or commercial SaaS or hosting companies the agreements will go the way of the subscriber but for retail or consumer it happens to tilt the other way particularly in this situation. I dont think its a big deal at all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigSqwert Posted December 19, 2012 Share Posted December 19, 2012 Things Aren't Free Forever Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted December 19, 2012 Share Posted December 19, 2012 QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Dec 19, 2012 -> 12:27 PM) Things Aren't Free Forever Then they shouldn't be scared about losing lots and lots of users. Having something free is a great way to attract lots of interest and use. People will use things when it's free that they won't pay a small amount for. If that is unacceptable to a company's long term business model, then it needs a different long term business model. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamshack Posted December 19, 2012 Author Share Posted December 19, 2012 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 19, 2012 -> 11:39 AM) Then they shouldn't be scared about losing lots and lots of users. Having something free is a great way to attract lots of interest and use. People will use things when it's free that they won't pay a small amount for. If that is unacceptable to a company's long term business model, then it needs a different long term business model. Funny thing is, most people would probably enter a contest to get their picture used by advertisers on tv or in print Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted December 19, 2012 Share Posted December 19, 2012 QUOTE (iamshack @ Dec 19, 2012 -> 02:10 PM) Funny thing is, most people would probably enter a contest to get their picture used by advertisers on tv or in print My photography work has been featured in the yearly newsletter of a small Central American country (and I really don't remember which one). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2HH Posted December 20, 2012 Share Posted December 20, 2012 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 19, 2012 -> 11:39 AM) Then they shouldn't be scared about losing lots and lots of users. Having something free is a great way to attract lots of interest and use. People will use things when it's free that they won't pay a small amount for. If that is unacceptable to a company's long term business model, then it needs a different long term business model. 100% agreed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeSox Posted December 20, 2012 Share Posted December 20, 2012 A key patent that Apple successfully used against Samsung in its multibillion-dollar courtroom brawl earlier this year has been invalidated by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. All 20 claims of U.S. patent No. 7,844,915 -- also known as the "pinch to zoom" patent -- were invalidated by the USPTO today, following a re-examination. http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-57560112...ung-under-fire/ the patent is actually much broader than just "pinch to zoom" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2HH Posted December 20, 2012 Share Posted December 20, 2012 QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Dec 20, 2012 -> 09:50 AM) http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-57560112...ung-under-fire/ the patent is actually much broader than just "pinch to zoom" These stories are often poorly written and they convey the wrong message via their inaccurate headlines. All this really means a review is in progress to invalidate, which can take years, be appealed, etc. Headline: XYZ patent invalidated! Reality: XYZ patent is still valid, but a lengthly review of said patent has been ordered. The patent in question in this article still stands as valid, however, until officially overturned. The way they write these articles, it sounds as if the patent is already invalid when it isn't. My opinion on patents is we need a complete overhaul worldwide on how patents work, but especially in the US and other countries like China, who simply steal other peoples ideas since they're almost impossible to be held accountable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chw42 Posted December 20, 2012 Share Posted December 20, 2012 (edited) QUOTE (Y2HH @ Dec 20, 2012 -> 10:45 AM) These stories are often poorly written and they convey the wrong message via their inaccurate headlines. All this really means a review is in progress to invalidate, which can take years, be appealed, etc. Headline: XYZ patent invalidated! Reality: XYZ patent is still valid, but a lengthly review of said patent has been ordered. The patent in question in this article still stands as valid, however, until officially overturned. The way they write these articles, it sounds as if the patent is already invalid when it isn't. My opinion on patents is we need a complete overhaul worldwide on how patents work, but especially in the US and other countries like China, who simply steal other peoples ideas since they're almost impossible to be held accountable. I doubt you can get China to overhaul whatever patent system they have. Even if you do, they probably won't enforce it. But I agree that the system needs an overhaul. This Samsung vs. Apple crap is stupid. It doesn't do anyone any good. Edited December 20, 2012 by chw42 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TaylorStSox Posted December 24, 2012 Share Posted December 24, 2012 (edited) Is it ever worth it to upgrade your processor on a laptop? I've got an older Dell Inspiron 15 with an i3. I'm about to upgrade the RAM. Is it even worth it to try to upgrade the cpu. or should I just look into buying a new machine in the near future. It's only got 3 gigs of RAM currently. I'm getting 8 GB because it's so cheap. Edited December 24, 2012 by TaylorStSox Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chw42 Posted December 24, 2012 Share Posted December 24, 2012 QUOTE (TaylorStSox @ Dec 23, 2012 -> 11:11 PM) Is it ever worth it to upgrade your processor on a laptop? I've got an older Dell Inspiron 15 with an i3. I'm about to upgrade the RAM. Is it even worth it to try to upgrade the cpu. or should I just look into buying a new machine in the near future. It's only got 3 gigs of RAM currently. I'm getting 8 GB because it's so cheap. I don't think you should be upgrading the processor on a laptop yourself unless you are really good at working in small, fragile places (no sex jokes please) and have the ability to solder. It's also worth mentioning that it's very hard to obtain a mobile version of a CPU. So no, you should not bother upgrading your laptop CPU unless you mean upgrading to a new laptop. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2HH Posted December 24, 2012 Share Posted December 24, 2012 QUOTE (chw42 @ Dec 23, 2012 -> 11:28 PM) I don't think you should be upgrading the processor on a laptop yourself unless you are really good at working in small, fragile places (no sex jokes please) and have the ability to solder. It's also worth mentioning that it's very hard to obtain a mobile version of a CPU. So no, you should not bother upgrading your laptop CPU unless you mean upgrading to a new laptop. Pretty much this. Laptops have custom designed motherboards/chips that you cannot buy in non-OEM formats, making them harder to fix and/or upgrade. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigSqwert Posted December 26, 2012 Share Posted December 26, 2012 (edited) The reply to this comment made me LOL in this Google Glass article. Edited December 26, 2012 by BigSqwert Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IlliniKrush Posted December 26, 2012 Share Posted December 26, 2012 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 19, 2012 -> 11:39 AM) Then they shouldn't be scared about losing lots and lots of users. Having something free is a great way to attract lots of interest and use. People will use things when it's free that they won't pay a small amount for. If that is unacceptable to a company's long term business model, then it needs a different long term business model. I'm unsure what you're saying here. You think they should keep it free? Or are you against the advertising model? Of course having something free will attract interest and use. But they have to make money, and as the article said, you basically have 2 options. If a product is that good, people will pay for it. You think if Facebook started charging per month, people wouldn't use it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted December 26, 2012 Share Posted December 26, 2012 QUOTE (IlliniKrush @ Dec 26, 2012 -> 05:38 PM) I'm unsure what you're saying here. You think they should keep it free? Or are you against the advertising model? Of course having something free will attract interest and use. But they have to make money, and as the article said, you basically have 2 options. If a product is that good, people will pay for it. You think if Facebook started charging per month, people wouldn't use it? I think if Facebook started charging a small amount per month, they'd immediately lose 90% of their users. Maybe more. There is a well established psychological response to something being free versus having to pay a very small amount for it. The financial difference can be almost negligible, but people respond differently to free. They will take things they don't need because they don't have to pay for them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigSqwert Posted December 26, 2012 Share Posted December 26, 2012 Just think flickr. Who actually pays for their pro account anymore? They've quickly become irrelevant. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted December 27, 2012 Share Posted December 27, 2012 If twitter is any indication, pretty soon...Microsoft is going to be selling a whole lot of "Surface" tablets at a loss. The iPad seems to have out-tweeted it by 50-1 over XMas. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jake Posted December 27, 2012 Share Posted December 27, 2012 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 26, 2012 -> 06:13 PM) If twitter is any indication, pretty soon...Microsoft is going to be selling a whole lot of "Surface" tablets at a loss. The iPad seems to have out-tweeted it by 50-1 over XMas. While Apple certainly outsold everybody else, there's something to be said about what products you think are worth tweeting about. Even if more people have a particular kind of tablet, the only ones with any name recognition are iPad and Kindle. I'm not about to make a facebook post about my ASUS TF300 because then I'd have to tell everyone what the hell that is. Same with all the people who wonder what a Nexus is, or have no idea that Microsoft made a tablet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.