Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 4th Jul 2009 00:40 UTC
Permalink for comment 371679
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Howard Fosdick on 05/24/13 21:41 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/24/13 14:44 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 23:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 22:04 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 22:01 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 17:52 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 22:23 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 13:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 13:30 UTC, submitted by JRepin
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 22:06 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2005-07-17
I'll agree with you there -- I feel like clone manufacturers shouldn't be selling these things in actual stores, but instead only online with a "build to order" type setups. Unfortunatlely, it seems like a "slippery slope" either way; if you allow the clone makers to exist, the brand dilution is bound to happen, whereas if you don't, you implicitly acknowledge a company's ability to legally restrict what a customer can do with a purchased product, which could lead to all sorts of crazy restrictions.
Personally, I'd say the former outcome is preferrable to the latter.