3 ms·
> They have no easy way to assess whether a given domain is a cool project run by a cool person or a malware sheltering scam site There most certainly is an ea
by jjk166 3y ago
> They have no easy way to assess whether a given domain is a cool project run by a cool person or a malware sheltering scam site
There most certainly is an easy way: have a human check the website. What you meant is there is no easy way that costs little to no money.
Unwillingness to pay for an adequate solution is not a legitimate excuse for negligence. If you can't afford to do things right, you can't afford to do them at all.
- anigbrowl 3y agoThe trademark attorneys aren't well qualified to do that, which is why it would have been smarter to respond to them directly and refer them to someone at ARM itself. Unwillingness to pay for an adequate solution is not a legitimate excuse for negligence. If you can't afford to do things right, you can't afford to do them at all. This is how you want things to be, not how they are. Corporations are focused on maximizing profits and lowering risk and cost.
- Dylan16807 3y ago> This is how you want things to be, not how they are. Calling it negligence is a judgement, not a wish.
- jjk166 3y agoWhere did I say the work should be done by trademark attorneys? They should have hired the appropriate people to do the required work. The original domain owner should not be responsible for fixing someone else's negligent mistake. And that's very much how things are. Go into any court room and argue "it's okay that someone suffered material damage as a foreseeable result of my actions because I saved money" and see how it goes. Corporations maximize profits within the limits of still carrying out their obligations.