Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 1st Sep 2010 20:24 UTC
Legal Well, this was rather unexpected. As it turns out, Commodore USA's CEO Barry Altman isn't particularly pleased about the article I wrote earlier today in which I placed a considerable amount of scepticism with regards to Commodore USA and its business (and website). He (not his lawyer) sent us a threatening email demanding we take down the article, post a new correction article, the whole shebang. The entire email - as an image, you'll want the original formatting - after the break. Our reply? We refer you to the reply given in the case of Arkell v. Pressdram.
Order by: Score:
What is your reply Thom?
by joshv on Wed 1st Sep 2010 20:30 UTC
joshv
Member since:
2006-03-18

Yes Thom, but what is your reply?

Reply Score: 2

RE: What is your reply Thom?
by rebus on Wed 1st Sep 2010 20:33 UTC in reply to "What is your reply Thom?"
rebus Member since:
2009-10-25

His reply is "f*** o**".

Reply Score: 10

RE: What is your reply Thom?
by Kroc on Wed 1st Sep 2010 20:35 UTC in reply to "What is your reply Thom?"
Kroc Member since:
2005-11-10

Following up on rebus’ comment

An unlikely piece of British legal history occurred in the case Arkell v. Pressdram (1971). The plaintiff was the subject of an article relating to illicit payments, and the magazine had ample evidence to back up the article. Arkell's lawyers wrote a letter which concluded: "His attitude to damages will be governed by the nature of your reply". The magazine's response was, in full: "We acknowledge your letter of 29th April referring to Mr J. Arkell. We note that Mr Arkell's attitude to damages will be governed by the nature of our reply and would therefore be grateful if you would inform us what his attitude to damages would be, were he to learn that the nature of our reply is as follows: fuck off." In the years following, the magazine would use this case as a euphemism for a blunt and coarse dismissal: for example, "We refer you to the reply given in the case of Arkell v. Pressdram"; or, perhaps, "His reply was similar to that given to the plaintiff in Arkell v. Pressdram".[16] As with "tired and emotional" this usage has spread far beyond the magazine.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Private_Eye#Litigation (linked in the news teaser)

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: What is your reply Thom?
by joshv on Thu 2nd Sep 2010 02:07 UTC in reply to "RE: What is your reply Thom?"
joshv Member since:
2006-03-18

"Fuck off"? - impressive. Puts your right up there in the big leagues - just like Ars Technica. Very professional.

Come on, seriously? OS News flung some poo, and your target flung it back. A pox on both your houses.

Grow up - both of you.

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: What is your reply Thom?
by gus3 on Thu 2nd Sep 2010 03:41 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: What is your reply Thom?"
gus3 Member since:
2010-09-02

Oh, puh-leaze. Thom gave this pathetic "threat" (copied and pasted from Chilling Effects, line breaks and highlights preserved so very well) exactly the response it deserved.

And now that this ploy is exposed, have you noticed their CTO begging everyone to "Take a chill pill" in a later thread? That's an attempt at damage control, one that deserves Eliyahu's eloquent reply.

Commodore USA needs to remember the First Rule of Holes: "When you find yourself in one, stop digging."

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: What is your reply Thom?
by tunkaflux on Thu 2nd Sep 2010 08:45 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: What is your reply Thom?"
tunkaflux Member since:
2006-01-25

Which thread is that?

Reply Score: 1

RE[5]: What is your reply Thom?
by gus3 on Thu 2nd Sep 2010 14:47 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: What is your reply Thom?"
gus3 Member since:
2010-09-02

It's the thread titled, "Take a chill pill". Your browser's search function should be able to find it.

Reply Score: 1

RE[4]: What is your reply Thom?
by joshv on Thu 2nd Sep 2010 12:47 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: What is your reply Thom?"
joshv Member since:
2006-03-18

Thom most certainly made some unsubstantiated and defamatory accusations. Does that mean he's wrong? No, he could be right. But even if he is right it's unprofessional to publish such accusations unless you have proof. I have no idea if what Thom did was legally classifiable as libel or slander, but it's not professional journalism.

Reply Score: 3

RE[5]: What is your reply Thom?
by Adam S on Thu 2nd Sep 2010 13:06 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: What is your reply Thom?"
Adam S Member since:
2005-04-01

I have no idea if what Thom did was legally classifiable as libel or slander, but it's not professional journalism.


You realize this is essentially a blog run by hobbiests, right? Not "professional journalists?"

Reply Score: 2

RE[6]: What is your reply Thom?
by joshv on Thu 2nd Sep 2010 13:40 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: What is your reply Thom?"
joshv Member since:
2006-03-18

I thought Thom had aspirations towards professional tech journalism. I now stand corrected.

Reply Score: 3

Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

I have no idea if what Thom did was legally classifiable as libel or slander, but it's not professional journalism.


Yes, because "professional" journalists never go hard on someone or something. Never-ever.

Guess you don't read the paper.

Reply Score: 2

RE[6]: What is your reply Thom?
by joshv on Thu 2nd Sep 2010 14:56 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: What is your reply Thom?"
joshv Member since:
2006-03-18

Well, you got me there Thom - there exists some low level of journalists who spout of unsupported defamatory statements in whatever rags they are published in, so sure, feel free to do the same.

Reply Score: 1

RE[7]: What is your reply Thom?
by ryanpq on Thu 2nd Sep 2010 20:52 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: What is your reply Thom?"
ryanpq Member since:
2005-07-06

Really? Both excerpts they included in their reply expressed an opinion and made no attempt to present the opinion as an undisputed fact. The fact that this legal threat (one that I honestly believe no lawyer in their right mind would think had any basis in law) came directly from the CEO so badly formatted certainly appears to indicate that at the least they are poorly organized or have a CEO with some very poor judgment or at at worst that they may be just the sort of folks Thom alludes that they are in his article in the first place. But, like Thom's comments those are just my opinions. If they are not a scam or vapor, the only way to prove it is by shipping real products to real customers. So in the end either Thom is right and yet another company will fade away without ever shipping anything but hype or they will ship real products to real customers and both Thom and now myself after this comment will have egg on our faces.

Reply Score: 1

RE[7]: What is your reply Thom?
by TheGZeus on Thu 2nd Sep 2010 22:54 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: What is your reply Thom?"
TheGZeus Member since:
2010-05-19

Well, you must be reading some very, very strange, banal publications if they never express any opinion in any article.

Seriously.

Maybe you just read the stuff that's re-prints of press releases (*coughCNetcough*) or watching NBC morning drek, but any real journalist trusts their gut, pursues information as much as possible, then if they can't get 100% of the facts (who can?) states an opinion as close to the facts as they can gather.

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: What is your reply Thom?
by atriq on Thu 2nd Sep 2010 15:39 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: What is your reply Thom?"
atriq Member since:
2007-10-18

This tone trolling is childish.

Reply Score: 1

hit a nerve much
by poundsmack on Wed 1st Sep 2010 20:33 UTC
poundsmack
Member since:
2005-07-13

I think you hit a nerve there a little thom, haha.

Reply Score: 2

RE: hit a nerve much
by kragil on Wed 1st Sep 2010 21:35 UTC in reply to "hit a nerve much"
kragil Member since:
2006-01-04

Yeah, I think so too, but I kinda knew this might happen, I just wish I commented on the article to proof it. Thom was quite harsh in his critique and small companies sometimes go ballistic when people write negative things about them.

Let's see what happens, Thom is safe, but David might get more trouble than he might want.

Justice is a cruel mistress, there is always the difference between being right, getting justice, enforcing justice. A lot of times it is just a lottery. Stay away from courts, people.

Reply Score: 2

Movie
by fretinator on Wed 1st Sep 2010 20:58 UTC
fretinator
Member since:
2005-07-06

Somehow the movie "Shaun of the Dead" codes to mind. I'm looking for my shovel now.

Reply Score: 4

Well...
by dylansmrjones on Wed 1st Sep 2010 21:01 UTC
dylansmrjones
Member since:
2005-10-02

Thom did ask for it, clearly stating that an apparently legitimate business was shady. It is useful to employ vague terms when publicly expressing what amounts to reasonable doubts about the legality of a company with an obviously amateur-looking website. Particularly when you do not have any solid evidence to support such doubts. It is safe to say that the website doesn't inspire confidence in the company, but going from that to claiming it reeks from being a hoax is not only very unwise; it is also unfounded, whatever lack of confidence we may have in this what-ever-it-is.

Reply Score: 4

RE: Well...
by brynet on Wed 1st Sep 2010 21:05 UTC in reply to "Well..."
brynet Member since:
2010-03-02

Welcome to the Internet, threating litigation against random websites only makes a company look petty.

The author of the story only shared his opinion, and because of the legal threats more people will as well.

If Commodore is going to make a come back in the 21st century, they might want to respect the 21st century freedoms many people expect online.

Edited 2010-09-01 21:06 UTC

Reply Score: 7

RE[2]: Well...
by PHGamer on Fri 3rd Sep 2010 20:14 UTC in reply to "RE: Well..."
PHGamer Member since:
2006-07-23

perhaps but libel is still libel even in the 21st century. Granted they could have responded better but you cant fuck all even on the internet. Especially if your in a 1st world country.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Well...
by No it isnt on Wed 1st Sep 2010 21:07 UTC in reply to "Well..."
No it isnt Member since:
2005-11-14

There's no legitimate "Amiga" business that doesn't look shady, these days.

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Well...
by Raffaele on Thu 2nd Sep 2010 03:34 UTC in reply to "RE: Well..."
Raffaele Member since:
2005-11-12

There's no legitimate "Amiga" business that doesn't look shady, these days.


Why you said that?

Acube and Hyperion are shady? A-EON is shady? MorphOS is shady? and AROS too?

Edited 2010-09-02 03:35 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Well...
by No it isnt on Thu 2nd Sep 2010 09:46 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Well..."
No it isnt Member since:
2005-11-14

Is AROS a business? Not really. It might become one, of course. The rest of them are mainly in the business of exploiting a brand name with loyal followers.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Well...
by Thom_Holwerda on Wed 1st Sep 2010 21:24 UTC in reply to "Well..."
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

I am well within my right to call things as I see them. Dubious website, long list of product announcements that never ship, one product that's merely a Cybernet machine, unilateral press releases, images taken from others without permission, and now an announcement that has attracted the attention of Hyperion's - a legitimate business - lawyers. I'd say me being careful and thinking this is a hoax or a con until proven otherwise is perfectly validated.

I seem to recall boatloads of people saying the same - and worse - about Psystar, and nobody here gave a crap about that either.

Prove us wrong, Commodore USA. I'll be the first to apologise.

Reply Score: 9

RE[2]: Well...
by mogwai82 on Wed 1st Sep 2010 21:43 UTC in reply to "RE: Well..."
mogwai82 Member since:
2010-03-15

Haa haa! I'd never heard of Commodore USA until you guys reported on them. I gave the website a quick glance, looked a bit ropey, but you know, could be small business, can't spend much on the site but on making the all-in-one keyboard-PC's, fair do's. Except it doesn't really look like they're making them either as Thom pointed out:

http://www.cybernetman.com/en/products/zerofootprintpc/

Haa haa! Photos look like complete rips. Brilliant. I'm just confused as to why they are pushing so hard?? I think Thom's well with his right to say they look a bit dodge... I think Thom shouldn't lose any sleep over it.

Might get myself a Cybernet all-in-one, look quite nice ;)

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Well...
by Morgan on Wed 1st Sep 2010 22:55 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Well..."
Morgan Member since:
2005-06-29

Yeah, I've known about Cybernet for a very long time, all the way back to the late 90s when I was asked to diagnose a problem with a POS system based on one. They are great little machines, packing a lot of punch into not much more space than a laptop.

In fact, the model I worked on back in the day was a marvel of size/performance ratio for its time. A desktop-class machine on a five-inch-square board in 1998, more powerful than most laptops yet with a smaller mainboard? It was genius!

I'm glad to see the company is not only still around, but doing well and still making very powerful keyboard-PCs.

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: Well...
by amadensor on Fri 3rd Sep 2010 14:44 UTC in reply to "RE: Well..."
amadensor Member since:
2006-04-10

Thom, maybe you could go one step further:

Prove you wrong, and you will put a nice article detailing the reality of their cool new machines here. That is how it finally went down with Pystar. Once they were shipping real products, you told everyone.

I am a big CBM fan (I have a working PET 2001 8N, a 2020 upgraded to 4040 a 128, a 1541, and a 1571 all hooked up in my basement. The 8032 is broken.) and was seriously considering purchasing from these people. I was a bit wary of their website as well, but was still willing to take a chance. Their legal notice to you took that all off the table. They are really going to have to prove themselves now if they want my money.

Reply Score: 1

So that's...
by randy7376 on Wed 1st Sep 2010 21:02 UTC
randy7376
Member since:
2005-08-08

So, that's how Commodore intend to make money!

If that's how their CEO is behaving and this is their business model, I sure the heck don't want anything to do with them or their computers.

Reply Score: 5

RE: So that's...
by Brunis on Thu 2nd Sep 2010 12:07 UTC in reply to "So that's..."
Brunis Member since:
2005-11-01

So, that's how Commodore intend to make money!


It's the desperate acts of any failing company, just look at Microsoft and Nokia..

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: So that's...
by Bill Shooter of Bul on Thu 2nd Sep 2010 17:43 UTC in reply to "RE: So that's..."
Bill Shooter of Bul Member since:
2006-07-14

And Apple and Oracle. And man are those companies going down the tube fast! Its like they're bob-sledding to bankruptcy!

Reply Score: 2

Not the best move
by bbell on Wed 1st Sep 2010 21:05 UTC
bbell
Member since:
2006-05-04

I don't think this move on the part of Commodore LLC is such a good idea.

It only makes the views of OSnews ring true.

I would have rather seen a note explaining everything missing from the news release, including clarifying the legal issues.

I do think selling computers like the Amiga and older 8-bit computers would be cool, and I would almost be tempted to buy one to play with.

I think the Amiga concept is interesting, and the look-a-like 8-bit machines too. As far as having a PC inside it, I would think something like a C64 DTV board inside would be even more interesting (with all the connections working for the I/O like disk drives/joysticks etc.). But I suppose an option with PC guts in it might sell as well. I would probably use it as a retro looking media PC.

As far as where the fellow operates from it doesn't surprise me its not a huge setup -- the number of retro fans is somewhat limited. If it were me I would start from my house too! If it takes off then look for a larger operation.

Anyways I will still wait to see these C64 shaped machines and the Amiga machines (particularly if priced reasonably IE wife proof).

Reply Score: 2

RE: Not the best move
by n0b0dy on Wed 1st Sep 2010 21:37 UTC in reply to "Not the best move"
n0b0dy Member since:
2009-09-03

Wow, a screenless, crippled laptop, that's so UNamazing. Lame...

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Not the best move
by judgen on Thu 2nd Sep 2010 01:04 UTC in reply to "RE: Not the best move"
judgen Member since:
2006-07-12

Maybe a "screenless" laptop is what i want, who are you to judge what system fits my needs best.
I am NOT saying that it is for everyone, but if the specs is correct and i can have both keyb* and computer as i used to back in the days in one kit, i would much prefer it to a laptop. Then i can just use whatever screen i like. And also even though they have shown no interest in supporting AROS yet, they might in the future and an installed base is kind of a good start.

AND the most important of all is the hand-warmer that is the AIO computer. (freezing my fingers off at this very moment, operating at -40 degrees)

Ok i am done. I am actually optimistic about this as most of teir products is allready available from other retailers, and to have the seal of beeing AROS compatible wont hurt.

Reply Score: 4

RE: Not the best move
by mabhatter on Thu 2nd Sep 2010 04:23 UTC in reply to "Not the best move"
mabhatter Member since:
2005-07-17

this site has tracked the Amiga/Commodore fiasco probably longer than this guy has held the rights ownership... pushing 10 years now. These are the fans waited for year with false hope and more bickering. If anybody is going to even care about a dead brand it's these folks that still have old machines running. I'd bet the Plantiff doesn't even OWN a working Commodore machine.

If he's running a business catering to 1980's fans, prove Thom wrong! Release a real product that does what it CLAIMS to do. Put up, shut up, or go home. There's over 100 articles just on OSNews that reference Commodore going back to 1997! They fail nearly every single time. (but Duke Nukem still hold the record, so they fail at that too.) We have a better chance of seen BeOS/BeNews come back again than a Commodore machine.

Reply Score: 5

RE[2]: Not the best move
by Raffaele on Thu 2nd Sep 2010 09:35 UTC in reply to "RE: Not the best move"
Raffaele Member since:
2005-11-12

this site has tracked the Amiga/Commodore fiasco probably longer than this guy has held the rights ownership... pushing 10 years now. These are the fans waited for year with false hope and more bickering. If anybody is going to even care about a still vital brand it's these folks that have purchased NEW machines running.


Fixed your un-informed incorrect statement... ;-P


Correct your statement I'd bet the Plantiff doesn't even OWN a working Commodore machine.


That's plain sure...


There's over 100 articles just on OSNews that reference Commodore going back to 1997! They fail nearly every single time.


Again uninformed.

Commodore is actually based in Netherlands and Commodore Gaming controlled brand produces High-End really Pumped-Up Computers for really geek core gamers and the other Commodore brand produces little electronic devices such as Commodre64 DTV (See wikipedia), and other thingies like MP3 devices, and data media such as blank CDs and DVDs for anyday usage.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C64_Direct-to-TV

(but Duke Nukem still hold the record, so they fail at that too.)


Really? I did not spotted such this huge number of Duke Nukem Articles here on OS-News site.

Perhaps you are referring to other sites?


We have a better chance of seen BeOS/BeNews come back again than a Commodore machine.


Phail...

Evidences said you fail at failing.

Next time be more informed about Computer Manufacturer Companies and brand buy & sellings, and/or their moving to Europe or moving to USA and vice-versa.

Computer world is very sparkling about passages of properties of brands.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commodore_Gaming

http://www.commodoregaming.com/pcshop/home.aspx?q=13,242

Commodore XX launched in 2007 sporting Core 2 Extreme Quad-Core 3GHz QX6850 CPU was really at top of gaming experience, and also the custom cases were very attractive (European based CBM cases were super cooled and extermely customized, and only the case costs about 200 Euro).

http://stuff.tv/review/commodore-xx/

Remember:

Commodore is actually based in Europe and Commodore IS NOT Amiga, and AMIGA IS NOT COMMODORE.

They have in the past a common experience, as commodore get the Amiga brand for some time, but Amiga lived its own live since the Commodore CBM USA demise in 1994 (And being precise it was a volunteer bankruptcy and ceasing of activities, decided on its own will, directly by Commodore owner and CEO canadian millionaire Irving Gould who did not want to renew funds to the Commodore firm and preferred to cease activities), and Commodore lives actually its own life branded as Commodore International a firm controlled by Netherland group Yeahronimo.

P.S. It seems to me AFAIK that Netherland group Yeahronimo has ceased activities and the brand Commodore was sold in 2010 to (Anonymous???/Not well known???) China Venture Capital Electronics Manufacturing Group.

Edited 2010-09-02 09:50 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Not the best move
by MORB on Thu 2nd Sep 2010 09:39 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Not the best move"
MORB Member since:
2005-07-06

Evidences said you fail at failing.


So, that means that he succeeded?

Reply Score: 3

RE[4]: Not the best move
by Raffaele on Thu 2nd Sep 2010 09:58 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Not the best move"
Raffaele Member since:
2005-11-12

"Evidences said you fail at failing.
So, that means that he succeeded? "

Dunno! :-D

He could claim it a success if he wants to... :-P

Actually I can't easily abandon my grammar attitudes as italian native speaker.

In my language double negative still makes the phrase stating negative... :-)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double_negative

Edited 2010-09-02 10:03 UTC

Reply Score: 2

Comment by mrAmiga500
by mrAmiga500 on Wed 1st Sep 2010 21:07 UTC
mrAmiga500
Member since:
2009-03-20

Threatening legal action is NOT a good way to instil trust and increase customers in a niche market - especially a niche market sick to death of legal action.

Reply Score: 4

RE: Comment by mrAmiga500
by reduz on Thu 2nd Sep 2010 00:28 UTC in reply to "Comment by mrAmiga500"
reduz Member since:
2006-02-25

Dear new owner #580 of the Commodore brand: Shut people up with a great product, not lawsuits or threatening a small site.

Reply Score: 8

Hey, Barry!
by Tuxie on Wed 1st Sep 2010 21:24 UTC
Tuxie
Member since:
2009-04-22

I'm sure that you will read this comment so here is a suggestion:

To succeed with your business you are very much dependent on the goodwill of Amiga fans. Please don't screw it up by being so aggressive. I really like the design of the C64/Amiga-style computers on your site and I do wish you and your company success so please don't alienate your potential fans and future customers like this. It will only make it worse.

Next time you see an article that you disagree with, just send a respectful mail explaining which facts were wrong in it and I'm sure that most, if not all, authors will be respectful back and let your opinion be heard.

Good luck!

Reply Score: 4

RE: Hey, Barry!
by David on Thu 2nd Sep 2010 20:49 UTC in reply to "Hey, Barry!"
David Member since:
1997-10-01

Speaking in my official capacity as the Publisher, when people send polite and respectful email to us complaining that they've been treated unfairly in an article in OSNews, I usually intervene on their behalf, even when I think they're being a whiny baby.

Reply Score: 2

tisk tisk
by poundsmack on Wed 1st Sep 2010 21:26 UTC
poundsmack
Member since:
2005-07-13

threatening a site whos users are very likely the kind of people that make up your target demographic, not a good idea.

I mean come on, apple can get away with that stuff but not commodore. and apple only gets away with it because apple fan boys are tools, "I'll buy anything that's shiny and made by apple" (note: i said fan boys, not users).

Reply Score: 9

Shady?
by tyrel on Wed 1st Sep 2010 21:29 UTC
tyrel
Member since:
2009-04-03

He only adds to his company's shadiness by contacting you himself rather than through the company's lawyer or, at the very least, PR folks. And that's a horribly written letter, if I do say so myself. Some CEO he is.

Reply Score: 4

RE: Shady?
by eliyahu on Wed 1st Sep 2010 21:31 UTC in reply to "Shady?"
eliyahu Member since:
2010-04-30

He only adds to his company's shadiness by contacting you himself rather than through the company's lawyer or, at the very least, PR folks. And that's a horribly written letter, if I do say so myself. Some CEO he is.

yeah, i'm fairly certain barry doesn't have any local staff. other than maybe some his family members elsewhere in south florida. PR people? no, for sure not.

-- eliyahu

Reply Score: 2

tmcd35
Member since:
2010-04-26

I've paraphrased (more b*st*rdised) a famous quote regarding the meaning of some peoples lives.

I think it aptly sums up the entire post C=64 history of both the Commodore and Amiga brand names.

Commodore went bust because they didn't know how to handle the brands properly and everyone who has owned the IP since has similarly f'ed it up.

The joke is the two brand names are still actually worth something and would probably sell bucket loads in the right hands.

Reply Score: 1

Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

The joke is the two brand names are still actually worth something and would probably sell bucket loads in the right hands.


I seriously doubt there's any worth in these brands. The majority of the computer users today don't know what Amiga and Commodore are and to the few that do know they signifiy screw ups and shady dealings.

Reply Score: 2

tmcd35 Member since:
2010-04-26

"I seriously doubt there's any worth in these brands. The majority of the computer users today don't know what Amiga and Commodore are and to the few that do know they signifiy screw ups and shady dealings."

I disagree. The C=64 was the best selling machine from the 8bit era. The Amiga itself, right up to Commodore's demise, was a hugely popular machine and not just with enthusiasts.

I think Commodore USA probably have they right idea, it's just looking very poorly executed.

Take the combined brand name of "Commodore Amiga" and slap it on the side of AiO keyboard PC's, iPad style Slate PC's and Netbooks. All at Walmat prices.

Stick to one well known OS - Ubuntu. AmigaOS, MorphOS, Comodo, etc, etc - is just not gonna sell. Windows will had a few $$$'s to the price and take away a USP from the brand, making it just another white box shipper (bad).

Get some PC/electric/supermarket retail stores to stock the product and you are on to a bit of a winner.

It's the approach Acer, E-Machine, Packard Bell, et al have taken for years and it generally works.

Edited 2010-09-02 09:22 UTC

Reply Score: 1

David Member since:
1997-10-01

Your statement is only true for people under 30. For people my age, and in fact a big swath of people from age 35 to 60, I'd say Commodore has huge cultural resonance. At least as much cultural resonance as other icons from the 80s such as Transformers. It's not like whoever owned the IP for Transormers had any problem cashing in on it.

Reply Score: 2

Can they proceed with legal proceedings?
by Almafeta on Wed 1st Sep 2010 21:51 UTC
Almafeta
Member since:
2007-02-22

Y'know, without bankrupting themselves.

Reply Score: 3

Brendan Member since:
2005-11-16

Hi,

Y'know, without bankrupting themselves.


I'm not sure that "themselves" should be plural. As far as I know, "Commodore USA" could just be some smelly fat bloke (with adult acne) living in his mother's basement; who's trying to run a "company" in his spare time (in-between inhaling doritos and armwrestling his purple-headed yogurt slinger) because he can't find a real job.

- Brendan

Reply Score: 3

Bobthearch Member since:
2006-01-27

How rude...

Made me LMAO. Thanks!

Reply Score: 2

vodoomoth Member since:
2010-03-30

How rude...

Made me LMAO. Thanks!

Same here.

However, I think we should not let ourselves be that disrespectful to that guy, whoever he is, and despite any other considerations we may have. OSNews being threatened is no excuse for a behavior, on our part, that my mom wouldn't like.

We published an article that cast a negative light on his business/the business he's CEO of. He's pissed off because he feels his company is being slandered. We can understand that. I do. Let him speak and let's be courteous as he hasn't been rude in his email. Even if he had been, it wouldn't have cost us anything to show him a better way of treating other people. Just my thoughts.

Reply Score: 3

sad but legitimate
by paolone on Wed 1st Sep 2010 22:03 UTC
paolone
Member since:
2007-09-24

Thom, Thom... there are mistakes that journalists may pay with money, lots of money, and one of these mistakes is frankly doubting about the honesty of a third party (being it a individual or a company), or openly state you don't trust him/her. You can in your mind, but you can't write it and spread it to the world. When dealing with such a matter, you should follow some basic journalism rules, which are "ask everyone you can and inform yourself before, the best way you can", "collect all informations and evidences you need" and then "adhere to the reality and place things as you wish". Altman has all the rights to ask you for removal if the article doesn't lay on solid facts, it's not censorship, is just everybody's right to defend themselves from free criticism and badmouthing.

Let Commodore USA site talk for itself and just look what they are doing next. You might be proven right or wrong, but you won't be hrut by this.

Reply Score: 1

RE: sad but legitimate
by Morgan on Wed 1st Sep 2010 22:42 UTC in reply to "sad but legitimate"
Morgan Member since:
2005-06-29

Here's the problem with your argument: Thom never said "it's a sketchy website and I can prove it!"

He stated his opinion, and in editorials (which most of his articles are) you can say how you perceive something all day long without it being libelous. Pick up any newspaper and turn to the editorials page; you'll find some of the most respected journalists in the field saying exactly what they think and feel about something, and the worst that happens to them is a letter from a reader making a counterpoint.

If that weren't the case, there would be no such thing as editorials because all the newspapers and journalists (and bloggers) would have been sued out of business long ago.

The USA (where OSNews is based) happens to be a country where such rights are protected. Therefore, Altman's demand holds no water, especially given that he doesn't even know what state to quote law from.

Reply Score: 3

RE: sad but legitimate
by Soulbender on Thu 2nd Sep 2010 03:22 UTC in reply to "sad but legitimate"
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

there are mistakes that journalists may pay with money


Well, a) OSnews is not an american newspaper and b) Thom is not a journalist.
Sure, Altman has the right to ask but Thom and osnews has the right to ignore him. Especially if osnews is not hosted in the U.S. (Is it? I dunno)
Thom is allowed to express his opinions in any way and form he see fit.

is just everybody's right to defend themselves from free criticism

Defending yourself from criticism would mean refuting Thom's claim, not just sending a blanket takedown notice. Of course, anyone with half a brain can see that it IS a very shady outfit so there's no real defense available to them.

Edited 2010-09-02 03:24 UTC

Reply Score: 1

Okay, show us
by zizban on Wed 1st Sep 2010 22:15 UTC
zizban
Member since:
2005-07-06

Okay Commodore USA, show us some proof of your license agreements. That will settle everything.

Reply Score: 2

Website Updated
by Almafeta on Wed 1st Sep 2010 22:28 UTC
Almafeta
Member since:
2007-02-22

People will note that the "Commodore" website has been updated. They've addressed some of the points I explicitly mentioned in an earlier comment (for example, they no longer represent themselves as being able to run OSX on a commodore) and the front page is different. However, there are still some large issues.

For example, they represent themselves as being able to run two OSs that presently do not exist for installation - "Comodo" (which, incidentally, is a trademark of the Comodo Group) and Chrome OS, which will never be directly available for anyone but Google's partners to use on cell phones.

Incidentally, the description of ChromeOS was directly stolen from the Wikipedia page on the topic. The fact that it reads almost the exact same as Wikipedia's introduction to the article on Google Chrome OS from a few revisiosn back - and still includes a reference to a Wikipedia footnote - makes the original source more clear. With neither attribution nor the licensure of the rest of that page under the GFDL, they have directly violated the GFDL license. Isn't plagiarism a criminal offense?

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Google_Chrome_OS&action=h...

Similarly, their description of Windows from the OS page is directly stolen from this Microsoft Store page:

http://store.microsoft.com/microsoft/Windows-7-Home-Premium-Upgrade...

The exact wording to their Ubuntu introduction also appears in many places on the internet, but I can't seem to find the original source. However, if you did find the original source, I'd bet you'd find it wrapped up in a "div class=promise", unlike every other section of the OS page. (EDIT: Other pages which quoted that text cited it to Ubuntu.com.)

Also, I was rather confused about the raw CSS appearing in plaintext atop the Phoenix page (like it once was on top of the main page? I thought it was IE8 being silly, so I first said nothing. No; it's a malformed REL attribute in their LINK tag, causing the first Style tag to be parsed as part of the REL attribute and thus dumping all that text into the body instead of being read as CSS. That's okay, because Citymax (their hosting provider) seems to insert just about every relevant CSS attribute into every other tag anyways... including references to an "Apple-style-span" which is then overwritten.

Someone get me some venture capital. I could run a quasi-legal Commodore outfit better than this.

Edited 2010-09-01 22:45 UTC

Reply Score: 10

RE: Website Updated
by Soulbender on Thu 2nd Sep 2010 03:26 UTC in reply to "Website Updated"
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

All the hallmarks of a professional operation, eh?

Reply Score: 4

Comment by Kasi
by Kasi on Wed 1st Sep 2010 22:32 UTC
Kasi
Member since:
2008-07-12

In his letter he shows that OCGA 51-5-11(b)(1) is copywritten. Does he have a license to use OCGA 51-5-11(b)(1)? Is Commode-more pirating statues as well as pictures?

Reply Score: 1

OCGA? Really?
by Morgan on Wed 1st Sep 2010 22:36 UTC
Morgan
Member since:
2005-06-29

The first thing I noticed about the letter was the code section quoted: O.C.G.A., as in the Official Code of Georgia, Annotated. I noticed this because my full time job is in law enforcement in the state of Georgia, and I deal with various parts of the O.C.G.A. every week. I found this interesting because I had no idea Commodore USA was based in my state.

Well as it turns out, they aren't. They are based in Ft. Lauderdale, Florida according to what I've found on their website and via Google.

So my question is, how is it possible for a company based in Florida to try to use a Georgia law against a website based in neither state?

I smell shenanigans.

Reply Score: 13

RE: OCGA? Really?
by eliyahu on Wed 1st Sep 2010 22:57 UTC in reply to "OCGA? Really?"
eliyahu Member since:
2010-04-30

So my question is, how is it possible for a company based in Florida to try to use a Georgia law against a website based in neither state?

I smell shenanigans.

it isn't possible. the company headquarters, a.k.a, home of the 'CEO,' is in south florida. thom is overseas. osnews.com is listed as having a nevada address. and as far as i know, the site host isn't in georgia either.

i think 'barry the CEO' copied something he found on google without understanding it. it would certainly fit with his behavior to date. ;)

EDIT: actually, i know he did because i just found the text he lifted almost verbatim: http://www.chillingeffects.org/protest/notice.cgi?NoticeID=780

i'm sorry, barry. you're a complete joke.

-- eliyahu

Edited 2010-09-01 23:00 UTC

Reply Score: 14

RE[2]: OCGA? Really?
by Almafeta on Wed 1st Sep 2010 23:03 UTC in reply to "RE: OCGA? Really?"
Almafeta Member since:
2007-02-22

it isn't possible. the company headquarters, a.k.a, home of the 'CEO,' is in south florida. thom is overseas. osnews.com is listed as having a nevada address. and as far as i know, the site host isn't in georgia either. i think 'barry the CEO' copied something he found on google without understanding it. it would certainly fit with his behavior to date. ;) EDIT: actually, i know he did because i just found the text he lifted almost verbatim: http://www.chillingeffects.org/protest/notice.cgi?NoticeID=780 i'm sorry, barry. you're a complete joke. -- eliyahu


So Barry Altman and "Commodore USA" is just a very dedicated troll?

Edited 2010-09-01 23:04 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: OCGA? Really?
by eliyahu on Wed 1st Sep 2010 23:08 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: OCGA? Really?"
eliyahu Member since:
2010-04-30

" it isn't possible. the company headquarters, a.k.a, home of the 'CEO,' is in south florida. thom is overseas. osnews.com is listed as having a nevada address. and as far as i know, the site host isn't in georgia either. i think 'barry the CEO' copied something he found on google without understanding it. it would certainly fit with his behavior to date. ;) EDIT: actually, i know he did because i just found the text he lifted almost verbatim: http://www.chillingeffects.org/protest/notice.cgi?NoticeID=780 i'm sorry, barry. you're a complete joke. -- eliyahu


So Barry Altman and "Commodore USA" is just a very dedicated troll?
"

no. just a clown trying to make a quick buck. what upsets me is that he has roped in at least one honest, good guy from the amiga forums to be his 'CTO' -- a 'CTO' who i'm sure really thinks this operation is legit and has no idea about the guy he's been dealing with so far.

-- eliyahu

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: OCGA? Really?
by Shannara on Thu 2nd Sep 2010 00:52 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: OCGA? Really?"
Shannara Member since:
2005-07-06

Which amiga forums?

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: OCGA? Really?
by brynet on Wed 1st Sep 2010 23:13 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: OCGA? Really?"
brynet Member since:
2010-03-02

This brings up an interesting question, are we even sure this email was from Commodore USA? perhaps it was forged by a fan?

It's probably a real email, but maybe not.. this should be looked into and confirmed.

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: OCGA? Really?
by eliyahu on Wed 1st Sep 2010 23:15 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: OCGA? Really?"
eliyahu Member since:
2010-04-30

This brings up an interesting question, are we even sure this email was from Commodore USA? perhaps it was forged by a fan?

It's probably a real email, but maybe not.. this should be looked into and confirmed.

that's actually a very good point. do we have email headers here that look legit at least, thom?

come on -- you've gotta post a follow-up with what we've found.

-- eliyahu

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: OCGA? Really?
by viton on Thu 2nd Sep 2010 01:03 UTC in reply to "RE: OCGA? Really?"
viton Member since:
2005-08-09

Recipient Information:
[Private]
[Private]
Atlanta, GA, 30303, Fulton

Heh... That explains the origin of "OCGA" =)

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: OCGA? Really?
by gus3 on Thu 2nd Sep 2010 01:46 UTC in reply to "RE: OCGA? Really?"
gus3 Member since:
2010-09-02

Not only the "OCGA" bit, but even the line breaks and the highlighted text got copied verbatim. Good find, eliyahu.

Reply Score: 2

Stage Name
by coreyography on Wed 1st Sep 2010 22:48 UTC
coreyography
Member since:
2009-03-06

C'mon, Mr. "Altman", admit it -- you are really Darl McBride!

Go Thom!

Edited 2010-09-01 22:49 UTC

Reply Score: 5

I'd say lets boycott them...
by Lazarus on Wed 1st Sep 2010 23:03 UTC
Lazarus
Member since:
2005-08-10

but do they even produce anything? would anyone be buying it anyway?

Reply Score: 2

Sketchy doesn't even BEGIN to cover it
by deathshadow on Wed 1st Sep 2010 23:16 UTC
deathshadow
Member since:
2005-07-12

Though "sleaze it out any old way" making it look fly-by-night does.

When many of the pages still show you the CSS at the top:
http://www.commodoreusa.net/Commodore_Phoenix_computer.html

Or have horribly broken layouts
http://www.commodoreusa.net/invictus.html

It's hardly a surprise for anyone to react negatively to their legitimacy. Fonts in PT size, 500+K pages, 70-80K of markup per page to deliver 3k of plaintext and 10-12 content images -- it screams "we don't know how to make a website" before we even peek under the hood!

With their new home page having 18 validation errors it's rubbish -- but many of the subpages have hundreds of validation errors meaning they don't even have HTML, they have gibberish. You take a look at the code, we can see willy nilly nonsensical indentation, Tranny doctype which is for supporting old/outdated/half-assed coding techniques, CSS inlined in the markup, javascript for no good reason since there's nothing on ANY of the pages which should warrant it's use, presentational markup, redundant properties, properties and attributes no coder should be using after 2002, tables for layout, nonsensical heading order, tag abuse, presentational images in the markup, javascript doing CSS' job, font-family lists that don't resolve on anything but a Mac, inlined style on EVERY P tag (which screams some crap WYSIWYG like frontpage or dreamweaver)...

There is more of 1997 to their site than 2010. They don't want to get flamed for their crappy website here's some advice - hire someone who knows something about building websites to do it for you instead of having some ten year old barf it up in Frontpage.

A CMS behind it wouldn't hurt either since it all appears to be static pages. Even a "poor man's" include system would be an improvement.

Of course I'm trying to figure out how they even show up on the search engines with empty meta fields, and zero actual content on the home page.

Edited 2010-09-01 23:35 UTC

Reply Score: 2

Karitku Member since:
2006-01-12

Lol, ever saw sites from small tech companies, they suck! But just because they suck doesn't mean you can call there business shady. I think Thom, once again, made himself fool by pulling this as "evidence". But I guess Barry decided to raise bets by pulling "suing CEO" card, not wise. But then again he does shed some light. Hyperion Entertaiment has never sued them, nor have they made any statement in there site, just small post on Amiga forum which I would call highly SHADY.

The Good: Fixing false information on Thoms original article
The Bad: Waving "I sue" card immidiatly.

Reply Score: 2

WereCatf Member since:
2006-02-15

Lol, ever saw sites from small tech companies, they suck! But just because they suck doesn't mean you can call there business shady. I think Thom, once again, made himself fool by pulling this as "evidence".

Err. It's okay for a website to look bad, but when they have stolen images in there... well, THAT'S what I would indeed call shady, would you not?

Reply Score: 4

yardstickwhack Member since:
2010-09-02

"Err. It's okay for a website to look bad, but when they have stolen images in there... well, THAT'S what I would indeed call shady, would you not?"

Not necessarily. I've worked for small tech companies that have been far from shady, but have had poorly made websites and not the best practices with sourcing, because of an insistence by the CEO's to build the websites themselves(sp?). Once a real web developer was hired, things became much more professional, but I could see how many would interpret the site as a sign that the company was shady. Even I, not being a web developer, could have made the sites much better.

Reply Score: 1

Bill Shooter of Bul Member since:
2006-07-14

I understand what you are saying, but its not a good idea. To a certain extent, image matters. It is a n industry where vaporware is an everyday occurance. There is always some company tryign to market their small, relatively insignificant product idea as the next big thing. If you really do have a decent product, your goal should be to not look like a vaporware company. Comodore USA presents its self as a company that isn't well financed and doesn't have a clue how to present itself as a company or its products. I don't have much confidence in them as a company. I am not willing to risk buying a piece of hardware from a company that will not be around to support it ( or even ship it).

A new company that doesn't look like it will survive very long as a company is the very definition of shady. Now, that does not mean I think they are a con. That really depends on your definition of con. I thik many small companies are trying to con venture capitalists into getting funding. That doesn't mean that they are trying to take consumers money without providing the product. It means they are trying to take the consumers money, to convince venture capitalists to give them significantly more money, in order to really afford to make the products that they've promised to make for the consumer. That's definitely shady. As someone who wants to protect fellow consumers, I could not in good conciousness recommend the products to anyone else, and fell compelled to advise them the reasons for avoiding them.

Is that harsh? Yes, very. Starting a business is not easy. Most fail. You have a very limited window of opportunity to succeed. All mistakes are increasingly more damaging the earlier you make them. Google can afford the failure of wave. Commodore, may not survive their crappy website and juvenile behaviour of their ceo.

Reply Score: 3

WereCatf Member since:
2006-02-15

It is a n industry where vaporware is an everyday occurance. There is always some company tryign to market their small, relatively insignificant product idea as the next big thing. If you really do have a decent product, your goal should be to not look like a vaporware company. Comodore USA presents its self as a company that isn't well financed and doesn't have a clue how to present itself as a company or its products.

As always, first image counts and these guys failed totally with that.

For one, they are selling computers and computers break all the time. As such it is important for the company to be able to provide support. However, their website looks like crap and makes you wonder if you'd get any kind of support whatsoever if you bought something from them. Hell, the website already makes you wonder if you'd get the product itself either.

Second, their CEO is throwing around baseless threats and clearly has no understanding of the law. As such can we as customers trust he knows any more about the laws regarding running such a shop and all the things he'll be liable for? And if a company's CEO doesn't understand the laws he's dealing with can such a company be trusted?

Third, atleast I find them untrustworthy the instant I see them using images taken from others without permission. Yes, it may be that the CEO just doesn't understand copyright laws, but that doesn't really make it any better: either the CEO doesn't understand the laws he's dealing with, or he has no respect for others and would screw them over as long as it benefits him.

They should have just hired a professional designer to do the websites right from the start. Good-looking, professional website creates a positive first image and I doubt they'd have gotten even nearly as much flak as they did now. And their CEO should have taught himself some things, like patience and basic understanding of copyrights, and refrained from posting such idiotic threats. And most definitely, they should have gotten themselves atleast a few dozen machines at hand and perhaps offer them for a review on exactly the sites who try to cast a negative image on them.

Reply Score: 3

umccullough Member since:
2006-01-26

It's okay for a website to look bad, but when they have stolen images in there... well, THAT'S what I would indeed call shady, would you not?


Didn't we just go through this?! It's not stealing! It's copyright infringement ;)

Ok, sorry, couldn't resist...

Reply Score: 2

bert64 Member since:
2007-04-23

A shoddy website does not mean the company is not legitimate, it just means they hired a cowboy web designer or tried to do it themselves...
I encounter a lot of legitimate businesses, some of which are fairly large (30+ employees working in an actual physical office, real customers, actual products or services you can buy etc)... Who have absolutely appalling websites full of validation errors, shoddy/outdated/bloated markup and even spelling mistakes.

Their site actually offers products for sale, has anyone actually tried purchasing one of them to see if it gets shipped?

Sure, their products may just be rebadged versions of someone else's products, but how many other companies do just that, or even just reselling without even rebranding?

And how many other companies announce vaporware products, many of which never see the light of day... Anyone remember WinFS?

Reply Score: 2

vodoomoth Member since:
2010-03-30


Their site actually offers products for sale, has anyone actually tried purchasing one of them to see if it gets shipped?

You mean, someone with some money to... what would be the most appropriate verb here? squander? spend? risk?

Reply Score: 1

Reader response
by jessesmith on Wed 1st Sep 2010 23:59 UTC
jessesmith
Member since:
2010-03-11

I thought it would be a good idea, in light of this letter, to send the following to Mr Altman. Let him know foolishness like this will hurt his company.

Mr Altman,

Having read your ridiculous and aggressive e-mail to the writers at OS News, I have to say that I am deeply disappointed in your conduct. I had been looking forward to trying and reviewing the upcoming products from Commodore. Instead, because of your inappropriate actions, I will be boycotting your company and advising my clients to do the same.

Reply Score: 1

And to think I used to own a C64…
by Bink on Thu 2nd Sep 2010 00:25 UTC
Bink
Member since:
2006-02-19

Thank you for this! I read your original piece on Commodore today and it didn’t change my opinion of what I already thought was a shady company (I haven’t seen a shittier web site in a LONG time), but after you posted Barry’s drivel, I am now certain of it. Thanks for taking the time to do this.

What a shame (sham?) Commodore has become—and to think I used to own a C64…

Reply Score: 1

For Real?
by Phloptical on Thu 2nd Sep 2010 00:43 UTC
Phloptical
Member since:
2006-10-10

I agree with whomever said to verify the source of the email. Probably some schmoe with too much free time on his hands......like a slashdot fan. ;)

Reply Score: 3

Playground?
by Ensue85A on Thu 2nd Sep 2010 00:50 UTC
Ensue85A
Member since:
2009-07-10

OMG! Are we on the playground?

Reply Score: 1

Take a chill pill
by BigBentheAussie on Thu 2nd Sep 2010 01:01 UTC
BigBentheAussie
Member since:
2008-03-29

Just a few things guys....

Do you realise that Commodore USA is a start-up?
Do you realise that it made no sense to invest in a fancy website until we had the trademark licenses sorted out?

Let's see, we've had the Commodore one for a week or two, and the Amiga one for a couple of days.
Don't worry, we'll have that fancy website soon enough.
That you don't think we have the trademarks licensed is rather insulting, both to us, and the people who actually own the trademarks.

That is all Hyperion are questioning and it is easily sorted out.

The response from **normal** people has been great and that is what is the most important.

You have no idea of what our plans are. Our situation. Nothing. You do realise we're going to sell our machines in stores don't you?

What happened with Thom is regrettable, but it only shows how callous people can be before they know the real story, or even bother to find out. Maybe it's a very Australian thing for me, to believe in giving people a fair go. To not rush to judgment, especially based on the lack of polish of a website, for Pete's sake.

We are not asking anyone for a kidney... or indeed anything at this point. The kind of criticism we are receiving is unjustified and in many cases borders on insanity.....it's rather amusing to watch actually.
Without the Commodore name you wouldn't care less about whatever it is you perceive to be our foibles.

It's a pity things cannot emerge fully realised from day one, but that is not the way things work. Rome was not built in a day.

Warmest Regards,
Leo Nigro
Chief Technology Officer,
Commodore USA, LLC
lan@commodoreusa.net

Reply Score: 1

RE: Take a chill pill
by eliyahu on Thu 2nd Sep 2010 01:28 UTC in reply to "Take a chill pill"
eliyahu Member since:
2010-04-30

You have no idea of what our plans are. Our situation. Nothing. You do realise we're going to sell our machines in stores don't you?

how would we know that? you just stated we know nothing of your plans.

What happened with Thom is regrettable, but it only shows how callous people can be before they know the real story, or even bother to find out. Maybe it's a very Australian thing for me, to believe in giving people a fair go. To not rush to judgment, especially based on the lack of polish of a website, for Pete's sake.

it's not an issue of a lack of polish, leo. let's get that cleared up right now. yes, the site looks horrible, but that is not what bothers people. let's talk about what does:

* what bothers people is stealing graphic works, airbrushing out the copyright notice, and posting it.

* what bothers people is using trademarks before securing a license to them when fair-use is obviously not an issue.

* what bothers people is lifting product images from google images -- images which do not reflect planned products.

* what bothers people is lifting, word-for-word text from other websites (such as ubuntu) without even a hat tip.

* what bothers people is suggesting mac os x might run on your products which would suggest people violate apple's EULA -- which is illegal.

We are not asking anyone for a kidney... or indeed anything at this point. The kind of criticism we are receiving is unjustified and in many cases borders on insanity.....it's rather amusing to watch actually.
Without the Commodore name you wouldn't care less about whatever it is you perceive to be our foibles.

no, what you're asking is for people to treat you seriously after your 'CEO' conducts business like a fifteen-year-old child. are you even paying attention? let me try and make this clearer:

your 'CEO' threatened an editor of a computing enthusiast site because he expressed an opinion. a well-founded opinion, IMO. and he did so COPYING A THREAT WORD FOR WORD FROM A RANDOM LEGAL SITE ON THE WEB!! he can't even write his own childish threat for goodness sakes.

It's a pity things cannot emerge fully realised from day one, but that is not the way things work. Rome was not built in a day.

obviously startups have growing pains. but they at least figure out their basic product plan, marketing strategy, and legal restrictions prior to announcing so they don't look foolish. and then when someone sees a constant stream of unprofessional behavior, draws a conclusion, and expresses an opinion, they try to see that as criticism and address it appropriately. not threaten to sue. not threaten to sue with a plagiarized form letter.

when you and barry have something in hand, then, and only then, should you announce it. after your infrastructure is in place. until then, quit calling yourselves CEOs and CTOs and talking about lawyers and PR people you don't have. you're operating out of barry's house. get grounded. come back. and then you can ask for respect. not before.

-- eliyahu

Reply Score: 11

RE[2]: Take a chill pill
by Alex Forster on Thu 2nd Sep 2010 01:33 UTC in reply to "RE: Take a chill pill"
Alex Forster Member since:
2005-08-12

when you and barry have something in hand, then, and only then, should you announce it. after your infrastructure is in place.


Emphasis here. I know you're a small startup and I'm sure you have good intentions, but consider stealth mode until you have more to show.

Reply Score: 4

RE: Take a chill pill
by Alex Forster on Thu 2nd Sep 2010 01:29 UTC in reply to "Take a chill pill"
Alex Forster Member since:
2005-08-12

So you would be the guy mentioned here? http://www.osnews.com/thread?439054

Expand on the threat from your partner.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Take a chill pill
by Soulbender on Thu 2nd Sep 2010 03:39 UTC in reply to "Take a chill pill"
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

Do you realise that it made no sense to invest in a fancy website until we had the trademark licenses sorted out?


Maybe you shouldnt actually put up a page at all before that is sorted out? You know, so you actually had a product that you can legally sell before putting them on your products page?
Anyway, how does this excuse stealing other companies copyrighted images and material? How does this excuse presenting incorrect information regarding the products and what OS they can run?

That you don't think we have the trademarks licensed is rather insulting, both to us, and the people who actually own the trademarks.


Uh, you just said you don't. If you had one you wouldnt still be "sorting it out". In the process of acquiring one != have one.

It's a pity things cannot emerge fully realised from day one, but that is not the way things work


Maybe you should spend more time working on actual products and creating your own web site content rather than threatening people who express an opinion.
Just sayin'.

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: Take a chill pill
by dylansmrjones on Fri 3rd Sep 2010 00:20 UTC in reply to "RE: Take a chill pill"
dylansmrjones Member since:
2005-10-02

Oops Soulbender. You misread past tense for present tense.

BigBenAussie clearly wrote "had sorted out" and not "have sorted out". E.g. at the time the website was made licenses weren't sorted out. They are however sorted out now. That's what he wrote, but not what you read, so your entire post is pointless. Much like CommodoreUSA ;)

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Take a chill pill
by Soulbender on Mon 6th Sep 2010 04:59 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Take a chill pill"
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

You misread past tense for present tense.

Perhaps.

They are however sorted out now.


Still though, the page was put up BEFORE the license issue hasd been settled.
And that still does not excuse stealing others copyrighted material.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Take a chill pill
by WereCatf on Thu 2nd Sep 2010 05:33 UTC in reply to "Take a chill pill"
WereCatf Member since:
2006-02-15

Just a few things guys....

Indeed, just a few things:

* You never addressed any of the complaints presented.
* You are defending a CEO who copies legal threats, word for word, from other sites.
* You guys are threatening the very audience you are trying to sell to.
* You are using stolen images from other sites about other companies' products and only removed their logos.
* You went ahead, threw up a (HORRIBLE) website, you have no products to sell, and are using the "Commodore" name without a license for it.

Way to go to build trust and fame. You know, you guys were already in a damn sink hole and now you're just digging even further down and using a damn excavator to it too, not just a shovel!

Reply Score: 4

RE: Take a chill pill
by MORB on Thu 2nd Sep 2010 09:06 UTC in reply to "Take a chill pill"
MORB Member since:
2005-07-06

Here's a few links for you:

Your business plan:
http://encyclopediadramatica.com/Unrealistic_expectations

What you're doing:
http://encyclopediadramatica.com/Lolsuit

Members of the amiga community:
http://encyclopediadramatica.com/Lolcow

(those particular ED pages are only slightly not safe for work. The site however generally isn't, so be warned of you click any link)

Reply Score: 2

RE: Take a chill pill
by Almafeta on Thu 2nd Sep 2010 16:48 UTC in reply to "Take a chill pill"
Almafeta Member since:
2007-02-22

Do you realise that it made no sense to invest in a fancy website until we had the trademark licenses sorted out? Let's see, we've had the Commodore one for a week or two, and the Amiga one for a couple of days.


Does anyone have a saved archive of the original website? One with the order page for Commodore-branded computers.

Because if so, then if it can be shown that this guy actually works at "Commodore USA", you could make an argument that "Commodore USA" was taking money for products they knew they did not have the legal right to sell.

Edited 2010-09-02 16:49 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Take a chill pill - archive.org
by jabbotts on Fri 3rd Sep 2010 01:42 UTC in reply to "RE: Take a chill pill"
jabbotts Member since:
2007-09-06

Check the waybackmachine a-la archive.org

Reply Score: 2

RE: Take a chill pill
by historyb on Thu 2nd Sep 2010 23:54 UTC in reply to "Take a chill pill"
historyb Member since:
2005-07-06

A shoddy and bad business indeed

Reply Score: 2

tylerdurden
Member since:
2009-03-17

Seriously, it seems that brand is forever destined to be owned by utter morons.

When you are trying to make it initially as a startup, you better learn to kiss some serious ass. And I mean, bend over backwards to create good will. Pissing off your actual target audience is beyond stupid.

Reply Score: 5

vodoomoth Member since:
2010-03-30

God, that's harsh. I'm ashamed it made me laugh so hard.

Reply Score: 1

Comment by alexandru_lz
by alexandru_lz on Thu 2nd Sep 2010 03:32 UTC
alexandru_lz
Member since:
2007-02-11

Being rather antisocial I don't post comments here too often, though I read OSnews every day.

But this is one particular case when I am finding it unable to meaningfully convey into words the copious amount of laughter I've had. This shit is incredible. If Microsoft had send a letter to every magazine or tech site that has ever had something negative about their software (or hell, even only about their business practices, or double hell, even only about their trials), the mere cost of printer ink and paper, or the medical insurance costs for the typists who would have developed severe arthritis from typing that much, would have driven them to bankruptcy.

Initially, I disagreed with Thom's assessment that Commodore USA looks like a con (sketchy website... meh, better sketchy than HP's mess). Now I agree; at best, they're probably a bunch of trolling lawyers who heard that there's money to be made from the Amiga trademark.

Edit: BTW, one thing is to be said in their defense -- the CEO, Barry Altman, is not entirely stranger to the electronics industry, so there is at least one member of the staff who doesn't only deal with paper pushing. But if it's one thing Commodore was good at (and we all know it wasn't marketing), that was their attitude towards hobbyists. Perhaps they should borrow it along with whatever trademarks they have.

Edited 2010-09-02 03:36 UTC

Reply Score: 5

RE: Comment by alexandru_lz
by vodoomoth on Thu 2nd Sep 2010 22:33 UTC in reply to "Comment by alexandru_lz"
vodoomoth Member since:
2010-03-30

Can you imagine the "copious amount of laughter" I've had reading you?
Seriously, you should post comments more often. Moreover, I like your writing style, it taught me some things.

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Comment by alexandru_lz
by alexandru_lz on Fri 3rd Sep 2010 03:35 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by alexandru_lz"
alexandru_lz Member since:
2007-02-11

Well, thanks :-) -- though I hope you will not be borrowing my incorrect grammar in the post ("had sent", not "had send"... meh, it was early in the morning).

There is one thing that has been going through my head, and now that I think of it, I think Thom is right in saying that at this moment, every Amiga business looks shoddy.

If a company came out with a great product that runs Amiga OS and can actually market it (i.e. send it to my corner of the world -- if they can send it here, chances are they can send some to the Klingons as well), that would be awesome even if it's not called Amiga <something>. Seriously, does anyone here actually care? If it looks like an Amiga, runs Amiga OS, but they can't call it Amiga because of the licensing -- well, as far as anyone is concerned, it's a new Amiga. Just go redneck-style, print a paper of the Amiga logo and stick it on it. If it worked on my coffee cup, it's going to work on my computer, too.

I'll be adding Rule #133 to my list of rules to follow in life: if a company begins by acquiring patents, trademarks and legal decisions before they actually have a damn office, they will hardly be able to screw a lightbulb, let alone build a computer. It's right after Rule #132, which says "our grandparents have been designing CPUs and computers for 60 years and all we got were these lousy x86_64 Dells."

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Comment by alexandru_lz
by vodoomoth on Fri 3rd Sep 2010 15:36 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by alexandru_lz"
vodoomoth Member since:
2010-03-30

You happen to have rules? What's #1?

Reply Score: 1

alexandru_lz Member since:
2007-02-11

The one young people with MBAs never seem to remember: when you have no idea what you're talking about, the guy who does is probably right.

Reply Score: 1

nt_jerkface
Member since:
2009-08-26

Does anyone really care about who started it?

Reply Score: 1

Comment by Bustanut
by Bustanut on Thu 2nd Sep 2010 03:59 UTC
Bustanut
Member since:
2009-09-04
As if we needed another reminder...
by Quietleaf on Thu 2nd Sep 2010 04:31 UTC
Quietleaf
Member since:
2005-11-11

...regarding the amoral nature of many lawyers. Never mind that every first world country protects speech, and never mind that the protection is doubly so when talking about the press. Take one hired-gun lawyer who wants to make his BMW payments, add in a similarly amoral CEO/CFO/whatever, shake and stir, and this is what you get.

I know, "we're just protecting our brand." Whatever. I'm as pro-business as the next person, but it's behavior like this that makes me wish that we had a way to instantly identify lawyers on the street. That way when I see one starving/hit by a car/crunched in his BMW/being attacked by zombies I can know to look the other way.

Some people call it karma.

Reply Score: 2

Cr@ppy justification
by bitwelder on Thu 2nd Sep 2010 06:50 UTC
bitwelder
Member since:
2010-04-27

Is the one shown in the pic the original format of the letter?
The way the letter has been justified (or rather, has NOT been) it's just abysmal.
Trying to be on par with their website?

Guide yourself, Thom! ;)

Reply Score: 1

RE: Cr@ppy justification
by Kroc on Thu 2nd Sep 2010 07:14 UTC in reply to "Cr@ppy justification"
Kroc Member since:
2005-11-10

Exactly as we received it, all lols intact.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Cr@ppy justification
by gus3 on Thu 2nd Sep 2010 22:07 UTC in reply to "Cr@ppy justification"
gus3 Member since:
2010-09-02

The sender copied it from http://www.chillingeffects.org/protest/notice.cgi?NoticeID=780 and didn't even bother removing the highlights on the search terms.

Reply Score: 1

lol
by cypress on Thu 2nd Sep 2010 06:56 UTC
cypress
Member since:
2005-07-11

This post made my day... ;) )

Reply Score: 2

Sad...
by gennss on Thu 2nd Sep 2010 13:06 UTC
gennss
Member since:
2010-09-02

Was so excited about this product, and the company had to be a troll... Great. Never buying from these guys.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Sad...
by MORB on Thu 2nd Sep 2010 13:27 UTC in reply to "Sad..."
MORB Member since:
2005-07-06

Never buying from these guys.


They're probable never going to sell anything anyway.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Sad...
by eliyahu on Thu 2nd Sep 2010 13:39 UTC in reply to "RE: Sad..."
eliyahu Member since:
2010-04-30

"Never buying from these guys.

They're probable never going to sell anything anyway.
"

on the contrary, i think if they actually hire someone to make 'commodore USA' look and operate like a real company, people will indeed buy their products. nostalgia is a powerful selling point, after all.

of course their products are all OEM PCs designed and manufactured by chinese firms who work in volume and happily print up labels and boxes for their customers to give them the facade of having products of their own. rather like barry's furniture empire, now that i think about it.

hey, since barry likes being a CEO and having people do everything for him, maybe he could contract out web development and a call center to india to sell his white goods. he could even hire someone in bangalore to find nice pictures and form letters for him to copy. :-P

-- eliyahu

Edited 2010-09-02 13:39 UTC

Reply Score: 3

press play on tape
by xaeropower on Thu 2nd Sep 2010 20:13 UTC
xaeropower
Member since:
2005-12-16

What a ragehead lol, what dose commodore want, becoming sco2?

If one thing I've learned from companies that the best thing is, not to answer for mails what they *don't like*.

Because this shows that they shit on you. I would just toss this mail to /dev/null but it's funny that you posted it on the site anyways ;)

Edited 2010-09-02 20:18 UTC

Reply Score: 1

Now I am convinced that they are frauds
by Alleister on Thu 2nd Sep 2010 23:37 UTC
Alleister
Member since:
2006-05-29

Now I am convinced that they are frauds. What legit company doesn't want press coverage?

Reply Score: 2

mbpark
Member since:
2005-11-17

This CommodoreUSA episode, and I call it that, just shows what happens when a brand goes under.

Realistically, no matter how hard you try, the re-hashes and attempts to rebuild something that once was using other components will never succeed to the expectations that some people have. Look at Guns N' Roses for the perfect example of that. If you want another example, look at Eyetech, who tried to make a next-generation Amiga, overextended themselves, and died in the process (probably due to crappy chips from MAI Logic).

Trying to bring back the days of Commodore by re-selling modern hardware in a retro case won't make you the metric ton of cash that it made Commodore's executives.

Realistically, the only "retro" projects in the C= world that have succeeded post-Commodore were the DTV and the CMD products. The DTV was priced cheaply, and the CMD products gave you a lot of performance for your buck. The Amiga world has had Cloanto, Individual Computers, AmigaOS 4.x, the SAM, MorphOS, and the Pegasos I and II as successes, plus MiniMig. They've had a lot more parasites (Merlancia et al) and broken promises from many well-meaning people, and Amiga Inc. than they should have, and the negative karma surrounding the Amiga name and brand has been shuddering, to say the least.

The people who got screwed the most so far have been Hyperion. Whether or not people like or dislike them, and they seem to be very polarizing (Ben Hermans) to some, they managed to put OS4.x out on the market, and people bought it. Now they've been basically told to go f*** themselves by Amiga Inc. because someone else wants to sell PCs with AROS as "Amigas" and probably got that right by promising people the sun, moon, and stars. These guys have worked their tails off for little money to rewrite an OS to run on modern hardware, which is no small task, and have been basically screwed by being told that they are no longer wanted or needed right before they are set to release newer hardware (the X1000 and Sam 460). As much as Trevor Dickenson is derided by many for trying to sell the X1000, he's doing far more than the armchair analysts who complain every day, and who are a very vocal subset of the Amiga community that has managed to drive away many users.

Trying to bring back other brands and basing a company on it is more often than not a losing proposition. Think of why you don't see new AMC or Packard cars. No sane investor who wants a ROI is going to buy that line unless there's a clear plan to sell many products quickly and cheaply.

Why are people going to buy Commodore when they can buy Dell at Wal-Mart? Any PC can run an emulator, and Nintendo still sells tons of Wiis that can run retro games. Why buy a PC that hooks up to a TV when you can get TVs that have powerful PCs built in, or have the ability to run full web browsers and videogames either through the TV or cable box?

The actions of Barry Altman have done nothing to quell the suspicions and fears of many out there, and have pissed off many in the hacker/hobbyist community that makes up the core of the C=/Amiga users. The actions they've taken have been repeated multiple times in this thread and do not bear repeating. The last thing the Amiga or Commodore communities need is someone else turning the Amiga message boards into Amateur Lawyer Hour. These are really smart people who pride themselves on originality, giving credit where credit is due, and creativity, and he's managed to piss on all of them very quickly.

Realistically, selling computers is a negative-margin business for many. Dell makes money by bundling crap with every PC, because if they didn't, they'd lose money making them. I do not foresee Commodore making a dent, not when Dell, HP, and Acer can push $300 PCs at Wal-Mart, or when Apple can sell 800Mhz handhelds for $300 that have access to thousands of games and apps. The only companies these days that make a decent profit actually selling computers are IBM and Apple, and that's because they can charge whatever they want and people will still buy them because they have the software they need to do business.

The only way that you're going to make a decent profit from the Commodore or Amiga brand names is to either get the Amiga games ported and sold on modern platforms like the Xbox360 Live arcade, iTunes Store, or Wii Market, or by managing to get a Amiga DTV device with games like Turrican and the Psygnosis ones on it out to market that can sell for $20-$30.

The projects that succeed are the ones that are done by the people that do them because they want to, not because of profit margins or complex corporate structures or "consortiums". The Commodore and Amiga communities are filled with very creative people whose motto should be "I'm from Missouri, Show Me!", and a lot of users who are big fans of their computers. Unfortunately, there have been many people who have tried to milk this for money, and a lot of people who have no idea of the hacker spirit that created the community in the first place, and desperately try to re-create the past instead of innovating for the future. The attempts to use nostalgia to get people to buy product usually fail, unless it's cheap.

Hardware, unfortunately these days, is a commodity. Slapping a C= badge on it won't sell many units. Calling it an Amiga won't sell many either, especially to people who see the past week's action as a slap in the face to the Friedens.

Reply Score: 2

Raffaele Member since:
2005-11-12

This CommodoreUSA episode, and I call it that, just shows what happens when a brand goes under.

[Megacut]



I agree mostly with the thing you said, but you missed the fact that this Commodore USA IS NOT COMMODORE.

Commodore actually is based in Europe (Netherlands) and the propriety is from asian (Chinese? Singapore?) Electronic Manufacturing Company called ASIARIM.

http://www.asiarim.net/index.html

There are no evidences that Commodore International based in Netherlands (where still remains the board of chairmen) has sold any rights for the name Commodore to this cybersquatter so-called ghost enterprise firm "CommodoreUSA".

As long as mr. Barry Altman now is user in this forum, then it is time to proof that he is legally entitled for the name COMMODORE, or please leave the scene forever.

Edited 2010-09-03 10:10 UTC

Reply Score: 2

mbpark Member since:
2005-11-17

Raffaele,

I did not miss that point. Perhaps you did not pick up on the subtleties there.

Reply Score: 1

viton Member since:
2005-08-09

Thanks I was not aware of them
Seems they have their own C= netbook
http://www.asiarim.net/projects.html
www.commodoreworld.com - under construction
commodorecorpusa.com - is not working at all

Reply Score: 2

viton Member since:
2005-08-09

There are no evidences that Commodore International based in Netherlands (where still remains the board of chairmen) has sold any rights for the name Commodore to this cybersquatter so-called ghost enterprise firm "CommodoreUSA"

http://www.prlog.org/10884490-commodore-announces-exclusive-worldwi...

Reply Score: 2

Raffaele Member since:
2005-11-12



OH ZOMG! is that for real?

So this announcement means the CommodoreUSA is for real and they purchased the rights for the name Commodore by Asiarim???

Reply Score: 2

Heck, not suing, but thanking
by friday on Fri 3rd Sep 2010 11:10 UTC
friday
Member since:
2008-07-08

I didn't know Commodore even existed today. I thought they had long gone out of business many years ago.

I checked their product line today, and while I'm not in the shopping mood, it was nice to browse their product line.

So, they should THANK OSNews for letting me know Commodore even existed.

Reply Score: 1

friday Member since:
2008-07-08

Could have fooled me. But, I now understand this situation a bit more. Still, interesting product line and I wish him well on his business.

But hopefully he'll learn a big lesson from SCO about litigation. It doesn't bring in profit just to have someone shut up. It's just a negative distraction from attempting to sell your products on the open market.

CommodoreUSA, make a convincing pitch as to why we should buy your products. We're open minded people. We love technology and are always looking for something new. If you have something interesting, market it to us.
But, suing one of our favorite websites is not the way to do it.

Reply Score: 1

"Reeks of massive con"
by charliefrown on Fri 3rd Sep 2010 12:53 UTC
charliefrown
Member since:
2010-09-03

How can aspiring journalist make such a statement? You should bear in mind that "presumptio innocentiae" principle is a basis of virtually every contemporary law system. Therefore you can not even make any suggestive statements until proven in court. The risk of defraudation ("con") seems to be dead serious charge in business world especially in these uncertain days and it takes only a few words too many to make an impact on company's assets. To me (professional lawyer and OS News enthusiast) the only person who should perform 'reality check' is not Commodore's lawyer, but Thom Holwerda himself.

Reply Score: 1

RE: "Reeks of massive con"
by gus3 on Fri 3rd Sep 2010 14:16 UTC in reply to ""Reeks of massive con""
gus3 Member since:
2010-09-02

First of all, this isn't a court of law, and your invocation of "presumption of innocence" applies only in criminal cases.

Second, in the USA, the truth is an absolute defense against accusations of slander and libel, and since this site is registered by a USA corporation, CommodoreUSA must prove that Thom affirmatively stated a fiction as fact.

Third, Thom's opinion has been borne out by the reaction from CommodoreUSA. They have only themselves to blame for that.

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: "Reeks of massive con"
by rcsteiner on Fri 3rd Sep 2010 17:52 UTC in reply to "RE: "Reeks of massive con""
rcsteiner Member since:
2005-07-12

While Thom might have a good defense, at least here in the US, that doesn't make him (or OSNews, or whoever) immune from the expense of defending his statements in court if the company in question decides to press the issue.

Reply Score: 2

Anyone notice their website...
by kallisti5 on Fri 3rd Sep 2010 21:25 UTC
kallisti5
Member since:
2009-09-08

Anyone notice their website looks like it was published in the early 90's on Geocities?

Way to be dumb Commodore USA.



UPDATE: BUWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA...

http://personalhomepage.me/post/651031298/barry-s-altman-is-the-pre...

Edited 2010-09-03 21:30 UTC

Reply Score: 1

RE: Anyone notice their website...
by viton on Sun 5th Sep 2010 13:00 UTC in reply to "Anyone notice their website..."
viton Member since:
2005-08-09
Do something useful Commodore!
by mgenaro on Sun 5th Sep 2010 17:41 UTC
mgenaro
Member since:
2005-07-23

Why don't they put money on the AROS project instead of wasting money and time on legal actions?

Reply Score: 1

Streisand effect in 3, 2, 1...
by sorpigal on Mon 6th Sep 2010 13:21 UTC
sorpigal
Member since:
2005-11-02

Nice work, fucktard company. I'm betting a bunch of OSNews readers would have bought your device anyway, should it ship, just for the novelty factor. Not now! I'll bet that 90% of the internet would never have read Thom's little editorial. Not now!

Congratulations, you've spread the seeds of your own destruction. Bullet, meet foot.

Reply Score: 2