sunchild

88 ms·

361.
by sunchild 15y ago
The test is whether a mark has "secondary meaning". http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/metaschool/fisher/domain/tm.htm
362.
by sunchild 15y ago
I think their lawyers wrote it poorly, and someone at Dropbox approved it too readily.
363.
by sunchild 15y ago
Are you going to sue them if they do it anyway? I don't think the case would take you very far, esp. since law enforcement only needs to tell you to direct DB to release the records.
364.
by sunchild 15y ago
If you're running a service like Dropbox, you need to be paying equal time to security and legal issues. It's the nature of their business. I'm impressed by how they handled this TOS issue, but I'm also disappointed that they didn't see i
365.
by sunchild 15y ago
This is beyond brilliant. I want this.
366.
by sunchild 15y ago
Things I see them both doing: playing catch-up, stumbling on user experience, appealing to the lowest common denominator rather than the leading edge.
367.
by sunchild 15y ago
Facebook is showing the signs of its alliance to Microsoft in more ways than one here.
368.
by sunchild 15y ago
Don't you lose the key features of Dropbox as a service: de-dup, sync, share, etc.? In that case, why not just store your stuff directly in S3 and cut out the middle man?
369.
by sunchild 15y ago
You can bet that Silver Lake will turn a handy profit on this soon. They move fast, and don't seem to lose very often. I've worked with them – impressive group of people, actually.
370.
by sunchild 15y ago
Indeed. That's the point I want to make!
371.
by sunchild 15y ago
We do agree. I also agree that my comment above was a little misleading. That's because the OP's article quotes a version of the Dropbox TOS that isn't the current version anymore, apparently. Sorry for the confusion!
372.
by sunchild 15y ago
Oh, I missed that. Thanks!
373.
by sunchild 15y ago
I'm not sure why you're being so cranky about this. I'm doing my best to be as clear as possible. 1. The Dropbox license is scoped correctly, IMO. It's as narrow as it should be, and not so narrow that it would impair their ability to pr
374.
by sunchild 15y ago
Non-exclusive just means that Dropbox isn't the only licensee. I've never once seen a consumer-facing TOS that purported to be exclusive. That's really not the issue here. The issue is whether the scope of Dropbox's license is overly-broa
375.
by sunchild 15y ago
I don't think I've evaded the comment at all. 1. The issue is the scope of the license. 2. The overly-broad scope chosen by Dropbox (and many others) is a valid reason to question their trustworthiness as a custodian of sensitive private
376.
by sunchild 15y ago
There are two factors that matter: 1. When the license ends. 2. What uses are permitted while the license is in effect. This is the part that is currently way too broad. It should be limited to what's necessary to carry out the user's ins
377.
by sunchild 15y ago
Actually, I think you're missing the point. 1. People seem to want to use Dropbox to store sensitive, private data. Most sensible people don't trust AT&T, Facebook, Microsoft, etc. for this purpose anymore because of their past gaffes
378.
by sunchild 15y ago
IMO, the right way to express this would have been "to the extent required for us to provide the Services that you use". Dropbox definitely does not understand the confidentiality requirements that (some of) their customers have. By reservi
379.
by sunchild 15y ago
And yet, everyone complained when Google automatically built your graph in Buzz...
380.
by sunchild 15y ago
Very true!
381.
by sunchild 15y ago
"No, it seems to have gone fine." You really think so? I find that statement sort of amazing. I guess ever the optimist, right?
382.
by sunchild 15y ago
It's a shame that they can't be bothered to learn about security, since they're in the business of holding other people's money. It seems that they have killed their amazing opportunity, and deeply harmed the public's confidence in bitcoin
383.
by sunchild 15y ago
Oops! StartSSL was compromised this month, although they say the issue is remediated now. http://news.netcraft.com/archives/2011/06/22/startssl-suspen...
384.
by sunchild 15y ago
Seems consistent with "search not sort".
385.
by sunchild 15y ago
Is uptime really the measure of a great mobile device? I've had some apps crash on my iPhone, but it's a minor annoyance to wait for a reboot. Also, I don't recall native Apple apps ever crashing. I doubt anything that RIM can do will out
386.
by sunchild 15y ago
I'd be a little bit concerned if I were building a web content recommendation system, and my competitor is the world's largest and best index of web content.
387.
by sunchild 15y ago
I believe the ISDA contracts are pretty close to being so standardized as to lend themselves to this. The problem with composing contracts from modular units is negotiations. You would need both parties to agree to work within a closed sys
388.
by sunchild 15y ago
Shoot me an email. I didn't find your presentation. I did find a Yahoo Answers on "Can a 4 foot long ball python kill a 4 lb. kitten?"
389.
by sunchild 15y ago
Also, you're focusing on statutory law. There is a whole, great, big, huge area of law that is contracts made between two arms-length parties. Very little of what I do as a lawyer involves interpreting or applying specific statutory laws.
390.
by sunchild 15y ago
I used to do this, too. It drove me crazy that my firm owned my work, though. Perhaps you have a more favorable arrangement with your employer?

More ›