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.
Permalink for comment 439035
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Website Updated
by Almafeta on Wed 1st Sep 2010 22:28 UTC
Member since:

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 They've addressed some of the points I explicitly mentioned in an earlier comment (for example, they no longer represent themselves as being able to run OSX on a commodore) and the front page is different.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?

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

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

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