3 ms·
True, true. And I'm free to call you "Jack-o-Matt", "Fizzlepitch", "qwjehkjsaldhaeb", and so on, calling them different, but correct, stylistic representations
by khedoros1 9y ago
True, true. And I'm free to call you "Jack-o-Matt", "Fizzlepitch", "qwjehkjsaldhaeb", and so on, calling them different, but correct, stylistic representations of your name. What you want to be called isn't "the law of the land".
Your opinion of the "correct" representation of your identity should hold more weight than my opinion, though. I'm not arguing ability, I'm arguing correctness.
- jacquesm 9y agoYes, but my identity is a legal identity and your mis-spellings would have some interesting side effects if you for instance tried to have me served. Hint: don't try that. And whether I write ios, iOs, IOS, iOS or whatever the correct spelling is doesn't matter one little bit.
- khedoros1 9y agoHeh. If you were serving an oddly-named company as a legal entity, or referring to a product of theirs in a legal document, I assume that you'd use whatever your lawyer deemed to be the least-ambiguous representation of the name, regardless of your own disdain for that representation.
- DerekL 9y agoThat reminds me of a line from Apple's response to an ITC complaint from HTC: > Apple denies that its correct name is Apple, Inc. The correct name of Respondent is Apple Inc. http://www.fosspatents.com/2011/11/apple-to-htc-dont-you-call-me-apple-inc.html http://www.fosspatents.com/2011/11/apple-to-htc-dont-you-cal...