PLanned Obsolescence is a scam that limits the life of electronic and electrical gadgets within a certain date
‘Back in October, some users were upset when Apple unveiled the fourth-generation iPad just seven months after the previous model arrived. Now the Brazilian Institute of Politics and Law Software (IBDI) has filed suit against Apple, claiming that the quick release of the iPad with Retina display constitutes “planned obsolescence” with regards to its predecessor, the New iPad.
‘According to Brazil’s Jornal do Comerciao, IBDI believes that Apple could have implemented the technological updates of the iPad 4 into the iPad 3. By not doing so, they believe that Apple took part in unfair business practices. Were Apple to lose in court, iPad 3 users in Brazil could receive some compensation…’
Says IBDI attorney Sergio Palomares:
One Baby Band with 5 Instruments [Video]
Baby Jams Out With 5 Instruments at Same Time
‘Props to Q’s proud dad, Joey Angerone, who edited the video for this baby prodigy. We’re sure in a few decades Joey will be editing Q’s music videos for MTV (or wherever they will be playing music by then)…’
BONUS: The 10 Cutest Videos of 2012
FCC orders 2M people to power down cell phone signal boosters (Updated)
‘The Federal Communications Commission today enacted a set of rules governing the sale and deployment of wireless signal boosters, devices consumers use to improve cell phone signals. More than 2 million of these devices are in use across the country, and until now consumers who bought them could just turn them on and let them work their magic.
‘Not anymore. Anyone who buys one of these devices from now on must seek the permission of carriers. Even the 2 million devices already in use must be turned off immediately unless their owners register them…’
The FCC states in an FAQ:
Your IP Address and Infringement
“just because an IP address is registered to an individual does not mean that he or she is guilty of infringement when that IP address is used to commit infringing activity…” Isn’t that reassuring to hear?
Motion to dismiss complaint for failure to state a claim granted in AF Holdings v Rogers
‘In a San Diego, California, case, AF Holdings v. Rogers, a motion to dismiss the complaint, for failure to state a claim, has been granted. Chief Judge Barry Ted Moskowitz ruled as follows:
‘[T]he Court is concerned about the lack of facts establishing that Defendant was using that IP address at that particular time. Indeed, the [complaint] does not explain what link, if any, there is between Defendant and the IP address. It is possible that Plaintiff sued Defendant because he is the subscriber to IP address …. As recognized by many courts, just because an IP address is registered to an individual does not mean that he or she is guilty of infringement when that IP address is used to commit infringing activity…’