6 ms·
Sure it does. They misused it and it is highly likely they will file another notice for another Flat UI design that in the future, for whatever reason they thin
by electic 14y ago
Sure it does. They misused it and it is highly likely they will file another notice for another Flat UI design that in the future, for whatever reason they think, look similar to their design.
- lucisferre 14y ago> it is highly likely they will file another notice for another Flat UI design that in the future Or, alternatively, they might realize what a mistake taking this approach was and never do it again. That's what I think is "highly likely" here.
- pifflesnort 14y agoI think trolling once still makes you a troll. It takes a certain sense of naive entitlement to issue a DMCA take-down notice without understanding the legal requirements or the very specific meaning of doing so.
- lowboy 14y agoI sang in a choir in grade 5 once. Would you consider me a singer?
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]
- pifflesnort 14y agoThat is some ... facile ... logic. If you murdered someone in 1995, would you be a murderer?
- lowboy 14y agoMurder is too loaded of a act to serve as a good example for this discussion, IMO, but just the once? I would describe myself as someone who had murdered, but not a murderer. There's an active/repetitive component to being described as an *-er. As I replied to electic, how would you feel if I described myself as a singer upon meeting someone, having only sang for 3 minutes out of the decades of my life? "Oh, hi, I'm lowboy, and I'm a singer".
- pifflesnort 14y ago> There's an active/repetitive component ... The persistent/active component is in having the personal constitution necessary to engaged in the action in question. The type of person, for instance, who files a false DMCA take-down request -- censoring another person's speech -- without understanding or appreciating the ethical and legal implications of what they are doing. "Repository unavailable due to DMCA takedown" -- https://github.com/designmodo/Flat-UI https://github.com/designmodo/Flat-UI
- lowboy 14y agoSure, but has LV engaged in this behaviour previously? If they haven't, then I don't think they could be described as patent trolls. Right now they might be engaged in patent trolling, but as my singing example hopefully illustrates, doing something once doesn't make one an active/repetitive doer of that thing. I'm not a singer, and feel that it would be dishonest of anyone to describe me as such. Same goes for LV with patent trolling.
- pifflesnort 14y agoYou seem to have missed my entire point. Since there's nothing I could write here other than a repeat of what I wrote earlier, I will instead simply refer to my above comment.
- lowboy 14y agoI read it. LV is engaging in one act of trolling at the moment, and they have the "personal constitution necessary to engage" in said trolling. No arguments there, and I don't condone what they're doing. But having the constitution to do an act doesn't mean one is a repeated doer of that act. Has LV actively trolled, or tried to censor people's speech in the past? If not, they shouldn't be described as patent trolls, merely that they are currently engaged in an act of patent trolling.
- jacalata 14y ago
- electic 14y agoYes, a bad one by professional standards, but yes.
- lowboy 14y agoSo how would you feel if I described myself as a singer upon meeting someone, having only sang for 3 minutes out of the decades of my life? "Oh, hi, I'm lowboy, and I'm a singer".
- electic 14y agoHere is a description of a patent troll. In this case, we have a DMCA troll. "one or more" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patent_troll http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patent_troll
- jakelazaroff 14y ago"with no intention to manufacture or market the product." So, no.
- lowboy 14y agoThat doesn't really speak to the issue. Please answer my question about me describing myself as a singer. Would you feel I was being dishonest as describing myself as such?
- coldtea 14y agoNot at all. It doesn't matter if you sang for 10 minutes or for 100 hours. There is no magic threshold number. If you identify yourself as a singer, you can claim to be one legitimately. You would only be dishonest if you claimed to be a professional singer or a regular singer.
- lowboy 14y agoI don't think that claim would have any merit though, much as if someone opened up Chrome dev tools one day, edited an html attribute and solely based on that experience called themselves a web developer. I feel it would be dishonest, or at the very least woefully ignorant of common usage of language when someone is described as an *-er.
- coldtea 14y agoAt that point it time I would definitely consider you a choir singer, and rightly so. And at THIS point in time, they DO file the DMCA thing.
- cmeranda 14y agoEven if they self-correct, it's how they'll be treated. They just tapped into a massive vein of loathing for vague DMCA notices (particularly on the design trend front), and did it quite effectively. In the case of incendiary actions with ugly consequences, once is enough to brand you.
- integraton 14y ago> they might realize what a mistake taking this approach was and never do it again It doesn't seem like he's learned anything, considering he's making jokes about it on twitter: https://twitter.com/Allan/status/309415721941753857 https://twitter.com/Allan/status/309415721941753857 https://twitter.com/Allan/status/309416516372275200 https://twitter.com/Allan/status/309416516372275200 https://twitter.com/Allan/status/309351344769204224 https://twitter.com/Allan/status/309351344769204224
- SmeelBe 14y agoHere is good point view - http://manufacturednormalcy.com/?p=70 http://manufacturednormalcy.com/?p=70