Re: Apple Computer changes its name

["mdj" <mdj.mdj@gmail.com>]

Paul Schlyter wrote:

> > IMO, This only makes it worse. You can achieve the fair use you're
> > entitled to, but only at inconvenience that's artificially imposed.
> >
> > That there's a way around it doesn't make it right
> >
> > Matt
>
> And how does one determine whether it's "right" or not?
>
> One can't, at least not in an objective way -- it's a matter of personal
> opinion.

Hmm :-) At the risk of sounding somewhat militant, I'll point out that
declaring objectivity unobtainable is a technique generally used by
those with a less defensible position, in order to create the illusion
that theirs has equal merit since both positions are 'subjective'. Of
course, such logic ignores the fact that subjective positions have
quantitative measures which can be used as the basis of objective
comparison, and is therefore fallacious.

> If one thinks it's not right, then one shall not buy music from Itunes.
> I don't buy music from Itunes for instance.  I don't even have an iPod
> (my two kids have one each though).
>
> If enough people refrain from buying music from Itunes, then Itunes
> will either change this practice - or go out of business.

The old "The free market will sort it out" argument. I've always found
this overly idealistic, since history is repleat with examples of
governments stepping in to 'free' markets that have atrophied due to
monopolisation :-)

In reality, the free market only operates this way when competition is
possible. In this particular case, the locks and controls (supported by
recent legislature) that particular players posess guarantees that this
style of market cannot exist - with obvious negative consequences for
both the consumer and other businesses who would like to compete.

Matt