Linked by Howard Fosdick on Fri 16th Nov 2012 07:43 UTC
Thread beginning with comment 542965
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[5]: Obviously not!
by lucas_maximus on Mon 19th Nov 2012 15:44
in reply to "RE[4]: Obviously not!"
Previously you and ilovebeer would not even acknowledge that there were laws on the books in the US which covers this nor were there previous cases to offer precedent. You both simply argued repeatedly that it is hatred of Microsoft.
No we were arguing that we didn't think that it broke the laws and those that were claiming with utter certainty that it had were mostly Microsoft haters.
Most of the comments on here were not regarding the any laws or precedents ... but how little room their Linux installations took up.




Member since:
2012-08-26
Then please do not be overly surprised if others who see your point of view, but challenge the reality of it also get frustrated with you and your attacks and frankly fight back.
There are several reasons that this is really a non-sequitur to the current discussion. The Surface was released almost a month ago. The Wii U was literally just released yesterday. However, if it proves to be a case of false advertising on the part of Nintendo, then I will have no problem if a lawsuit goes forward for them either.
How accessible should the FAQ be? Is there an actual number of clicks defined in law ...
Sorry the accessibility of the FAQ is an opinion.
And since there isn't a definitive verdict in this case, it is a matter of opinion whether they are or not. If and when there is a verdict and it disagrees with me, I will concede you are correct.
But there is merit and precedent for a lawsuit, and it is quite probable that there is some issues with false advertising going on. Previously you and ilovebeer would not even acknowledge that there were laws on the books in the US which covers this nor were there previous cases to offer precedent. You both simply argued repeatedly that it is hatred of Microsoft. If you alone, are now accepting the reality, then fine, let's wait and see what the verdict is. I am also willing to concede that your 'opinion' may be correct if the verdict disagrees with my 'opinion'.