How people justify shopping Big Box

Big Box stores – almost everyone has shopped at one at some point in time. Wal-Mart, Target, Best Buy, Toys ‘R’ Us, you just can’t beat them on their prices. They have so much purchasing power by buying their goods in freakishly huge quantities that they run smaller mom & pop shops right into the ground. The average business cannot even begin to compete with them in most aspects. I hear people say they want to support small business but can’t afford to. This annoys me on many levels because everyone can afford to support local business, they just chose not to & they make excuses to justify their choice. Let’s look at those justifications.

Big Box stores are cheaper.

Not more affordable. I could go into Wal-mart and buy a lamp for $25 or go into the locally run furniture store and buy one for $50 or more. Technically Wal-mart has a lower price but do they have a better product? Additionally, do I really need another lamp or am I just buying one because I can afford to if it is $25.

The terms cheap and affordable are related terms however, do not have the same meaning. If you use them in the correct way, you can start to change the way you think.

Cheap: Low and/or reduced in price; Of poor quality; Of little worth; unfairly powerful.

Affordable: that you have the financial means for.

Big Box stores are contributing to the economic failure of American families.

There it is, I said it. Consumers are nickel and diming their hard earned income away and not even noticing. I am a firm believer in just because you can, doesn’t mean you should. What is it that you want and what is it that you really truly need. American’s are really good at being wasteful like no where else in the world. We have convinced ourselves that the more stuff we have the more successful we are and Big Box stores have no problem telling us that is indeed fact. We need big houses to hold all of our stuff and we need big cars to transport all of our stuff. We spend most of our money credit card payments for this stuff and then buy houses we cannot afford and lease cars that will never be ours. We don’t actually own anything but we are in debt for it all.

We can never have enough, it’s a constant pursuit of material happiness that we think we will find in substandard products. Big Box stores are there to help us in our pursuit of happiness.

What kind of quality do you find in Big Box stores? Not high quality, that is for certain. Pressboard furniture (made of sawdust and glue), cheaply made clothes that fall apart at the seams after a wash or two, toys that don’t least more than a few months of playtime and somehow we decided that this was all acceptable. You get what you pay for and we seem to be ok with that. We repeat the mantra they don’t make things like they used to and head up to Target and buy another one. Here’s the thing, they DO make them like they used to they just don’t sell them where you shop. We are so stuck in the vicious cycle of more stuff we don’t take the time to reflect on it. We have so much stuff we don’t even use that we buy pressboard furniture to store it in. I don’t know how many times I have heard people say they need a bigger house. I tend to ask why and they tell me because they don’t have room for all of  their stuff.

Instead of buying twice as many crummy things we could spend our money on things that have quality, will be a value to us, and that will last or at least give us resale value should we decide to replace it in the future.

Ah, resale value. Now this is the whole reason for my post.

Why buy it used when you can buy it new?

I had a yard sale this weekend with some friends. We priced items very reasonably and only sold items of good quality and we had a hard time even giving the stuff away. One of the things I overheard from a shopper ,”Why pay $3 for a child’s outfit that still *looks* new at a yard sale when they can pay $9 for one that *is* new at Wal-Mart?” It was that that made me write this. I can tell you why I would, because the child will outgrow that outfit in just a few months and I have better things to spend my money on. I buy a like new item for less than half of the new value and I have saved that much money to spend on other things I need or want that have more value to me.

There are many outlets for reselling everyday items including newspapers, flea markets, yard sale, Craigslist, and Ebay. You can find anything somewhere for the right price (and maybe shipping and handling). Obviously the more rare and in demand an item is the higher the cost is driven but, what about everyday necessities? We can factor the value of a used item based on it’s condition then take that number and using basic economic pricipals we learned in primary or secondary education factor in it’s market saturation or availability and adjust the price accordingly. What I have discovered is that current trends are showing that the value of a used item isn’t anything close to what it should be (we are also seeing this with real estate, automobiles, and other things but that’s another post). The majority of consumers are neither educated shoppers nor are they capable of understanding the value of a product – they are only seeing a small piece of the computation. They see a product, compare that product based on price in the Big Box discount stores where they shop and instantly place a value on it.

Example: Hardwood dining table handcrafted and sells new for $1500.00. Listed used but in excellent condition for $500 (considerably less than what they could ask for it but lets say the seller really wants to get rid of it). Consumers view picture (or actual item) and note that while it is in good condition there might be normal and nominal wear and tear so price is mentally calculated as 1/2 of retail costs. Sound reasonable so far? Wait for it. Consumer draws up comparable (to their memory) item, ie, superstore butcher block kitchen table. Retail price anywhere from $150 – $300 for substandard mass produced quality. Consumer instantly comes to the calculations that this previously owned table should be worth $60-$150 and might go as far as to offer such an absurd and unreasonable price to the seller. Seem like a fictional scenario to you? I witnessed this again and again in person last weekend. Item is either sold for an insane price, given away, or ends up in a dumpster because it’s just more trouble than it’s worth – literally.

Big Box stores have now not only managed to run out the mom and pop stores that provided higher quality and better customer attention but has successfully underminded used resell values. People cannot resell their items and they might very well end up piling up a landfill and I can’t imagine that all these crummy man made materials biodegrade all that well. Even if you aren’t greenminded think of all the potential heirlooms that are lost everyday because the disposable household items won’t hold up to pass to your children much less your grandchildren and beyond. Personally I am proud to have an opportunity to share stories of my grandparents when they were young and newlyweds because the kids asked me about my bedroom set which just so happened to be their very first one after they married. To some it might be an outdated dresser, to me it is memories everytime I give it a fresh coat of paint and a set of shiny new drawer pulls.

Before my train of thought got derailed I was talking about crazy consumer calculations and thought processes but I started testing theories.

The more you get the better the deal.

What is a better deal; 25 cents per item or 4 for a $1? Four is more than one so four for a dollar has to be a better value! I know, just bear with me. Big Box has spent a lot of time convincing us that more is better and it has sunk in. Buy one get one half off sales draw in consumers like no tomorrow. Drug stores regularly have sales of this kind on more expensive shampoos and makeup and I frequently see shelves sold out of these products by Monday evening even though the sale was only announced the day before. This is only 25% off two items but if it was advertised that way it wouldn’t draw in nearly as many sales. The items are already higher priced items to begin with so the profit margin is higher and is the $4 shampoo really a better quality than say a $2 shampoo? Frequently  consumer reports have found that there isn’t a difference in many products except the name, label and resale cost. If you are marketer you get paid to come up with this language that gets the consumers in and spending their hard earned dollars. Kuddos to you for fooling so many of us.

Herding the sheeple

My daughter recently went through a life skills class. They were assigned jobs, incomes, and bank accounts. They were taught to shop, buy homes, and spend money. They are seventh graders and this is one of the last mandatory classes they will ever have on these skills. She was assigned computer programmer and given an annual salary of $25,000 per year (quiet you geeks, I know this is insane) and her friend was given the occupation of physician and paid $300,000 per year. The went into their professions with no student loan debt which in my opinion was already a massive fail and told to find housing. My daughter (lucky girl she listens to me sometimes) decided to room with a friend in an apartment and split living expenses. Needless to say she ended the class with a healthy checkbook. Her doctor friend bought a very expensive home and while she was doing well with her annual salary didn’t have much left over when all her expenses were calculated. The funny (sad) thing is that her friend mocked her for not having all the wonderful things she herself had as a doctor. Good thing she didn’t find out how life can throw a malpractice suit at you and take everything you have.

Really, there was a point to this and the point was, we are failing to educate our future. We are teaching them how to spend but not how to be smart consumers or how to save money. We are teaching them more is better and that quality doesn’t matter but quantitiy is everything. We are hearding a new generation of sheeple off the cliff of dependency and failure. Why should we stop? We need consumers to spend so that we have more stores, bigger profit margins, and fatter bankrolls.

Don’t forget, Big Box isn’t just Wal-Mart, Target, Best Buy, Fry, and other similar shops but includes grocery chains, fast food, and sit down frozen cooked to order chains like Applebee’s and TGI Fridays just to name a few.

I could take this in so many directions I might just write an e-book but until then you get the point. Big Box contributes to waste: consumer over spending, landfill filling, destruction of small community business and more. Is it worth it to have one on all sides of town?

Is the convenience worth the loss?

Do you really need all that stuff?

It is the internet that enables us to get news out about causes and issues that the mainstream media misses or doesn’t deem newsworthy. It is the internet that allows grassroots efforts to take hold in ways that were never possible before. It increases our reach and connects the urban with the rural.

The internet is the ultimate library and you can learn just about anything your heart desires. I have learned to knit from instructions, videos and tips posted on the internet. I have found new favorite recipes, sewing patterns, craft ideas, parenting tips, and heard of causes that I just had to get involved in.

One such cause is the CPSIA (CPSIA stands for Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act). As a mother of four I was outraged when I discovered not all that long ago that we were importing toys and clothing for our children that contained unsafe levels of lead. I couldn’t understant how in this day and age of technology this was happening to our children. Like many others, I wanted our government to do something about it and take action. I got my wish however, it is at the expense of many thousands of home businesses, and even my own hobbies.

The threat to our children came from big business and lazy multimillion dollar companies not small craftsmen making toys in their garage or the nice lady down the street making handknit blankets for babies but the CPSIA will shut them down. Rocks in My Dryer as a great article and explanation of the devastating aftermath that a vague CPSIA will have. The CPSIA will not only effect crafts people, but libraries (childrens books are not excluded), second hand stores, and thrift stores. All of these untested items will become toxic waste and be required to be destroyed or individuals and organizations could face penalties of law and/or civil lawsuits. Your only option for purchasing items for your children could wind up being by shopping at the chain stores. I find this appalling and unacceptable.

Last but not least, I thought of Project Linus and other non-profit groups that provide homemade blankets, toys, and baby hats to children that are hospitalized. These will all fall under the CPSIA and children across the country will loose that little bit of human warmth they used to receive from caring individuals trying to make them feel a little more comfortable when sick and lonely.

You can do something. Checkout the page at the Blessed Nest on what is happening with the CPSIA and how you can get involved to stop it without the needed language that makes it a catchall.

Did you know that 70% of those living in poverty around the world are women?

With the financial crisis looming and gas and necessities costs soaring you may be scrimping and saving for your own family but there are ways you can still help.

Women’s Career Clothing Closets

Working women’s clothing closets exist all over the country to help women build a professional wardrobe so that they can secure good paying jobs and end the cycle of poverty. Help women get on their feet by donating gently used professional clothing. It helps others and reduces your closet clutter at the same time!

Numerous organizations for clothing donations exist, here are a few or google for more:

• Women’s Resource Center, Michigan
• Women’s Career Clothing Closet, West Virginia
• Women’s Discovery Center, Arkansas
• Charity Guide: 15 Places to Donate Gently Used Women’s Clothing

Be a Mentor

Donate your time and your experience by mentoring others. Support from others can significantly increase the chances of success and mentoring is an excellent way to give back without costing any money.

MentorNet is an organization linking mentors to students that are seeking assistance via the Internet. MentorNet is a nonprofit e-mentoring network that positively affects the retention and success of those in engineering, science and mathematics, particularly but not exclusively women and others underrepresented in these fields. By corresponding through emails and chats you can share your advice, experience, and support with a young person.

Interested in mentoring in person? Find an group in need of mentors in your area through Mentor.org’s opportunity locator. Put in your zip code and the distance you are willing to travel and Mentor.org gives you a list of organizations to contact.

According to a Press Release from Rep. Jeff Morris (D – Mount Vernon) a new law in Washington will hereby may malicious RFID scanning illegal (this seems like a no brainer to me) such as for the purposes of identity theft. The law states that it would be a Class C felony to “intentionally scan another person’s identification remotely without his or her knowledge and consent, for the purpose of fraud, identity theft, or some other illegal purpose”.

The bummer side? The opt-in requirements for retailers to provide consumer protection by not scanning a customer, their ID, credit card, shoes, products, or whatnot without their expressed permission has been left out of the language due to heavy lobbying by corporations.

I find this completely unacceptable and think the consumers need to do a little mass lobbying of their own. Please consider contacting Rep. Jeff Morris or his staff to voice your support of the opt-in measure even if you aren’t in Washington. His contact information is available on the original press release.

Additional Reading:

• RFID Hack Hits 1-Billion Digital Access Cards Worldwide
• RFID Position Statement of Consumer Privacy and Civil Liberties Organizations

Flickr image from midnightcomm under CC

From Escapist Magazine:

John Hillier of the European industry group Entertainment & Leisure Software Publishers Association (ELSPA) has claimed that 90 percent of Nintendo DS owners in America are using pirated games.

Not only does that number sound ridiculously bloated, but that would mean that nine out of ten DS owners in the US are using illegal games on a modded DS. According to those numbers I would then have to assume most of my friends that have the Nintendo DS are pirates especially since they are technical types who are more into modding their tech. Out of the 25+ people I know with a DS, not one of them are playing pirated games and no one is using the R4 chip as stated later in the article.

Speaking to the Sunday Post about the R4 “pirate chip” for the DS, Hillier, manager of the association’s Intellectual Property Crimes Unit, said, “In America it’s thought 90 percent of Nintendo DS users are playing pirated games because of R4s. Takings from Nintendo DS games in the U.S. are lower than any other console and no doubt it will have a similar impact (in the U.K.).”

See there, “in America it’s thought”… THOUGHT – in other words, we make up the numbers because people aren’t buying the sucky games we sell for bloated costs. I am applying for a high ranking job in one of these companies because I can make up ridiculous numbers for shock value  therefore justifying my expenses and salary (see resume under skills and qualifications: grossly inflate statistics to scare consumers into sending us money).

How many awesome games have come out for the DS? Animal Crossing WW was a big hit, that cooking game, Brain Age… just because your sales are down, does not mean people are stealing rampantly. Apparently the new business model is to support an old failing business model by screaming piracy and collecting unearned profits from people too afraid, too monetarily restricted, or too uneducated to defend themselves from the false prosecution. See also patent trolls and other such business models that requires little actual innovation or work but has the potential to reap big rewards. This is a modern scam artist tactic under a big corporate umbrella of legitimacy.

Pirate:

• commandeer: take arbitrarily or by force
• Piracy is robbery committed at sea, or sometimes on the shore, by an agent without a commission from a sovereign nation. Although the terms are often used interchangeably, the difference between a pirate and a privateer is that the privateer was commissioned by a government and the pirate was non-commissioned. (See Privateer)

Who’s the pirate now?

Check out Her site, read the tips, and review the plugins. If you found the site as useful as I did, please consider donating to help her with her legal fees and as a nice gesture to return a little bit to someone who provides all these awesome things that help us run our sites a little better. Every amount helps. Got a dollar? Consider sharing it. It will get you good Karma points in the long run. ;)

Note: My deepest apologies for the original post which I mistakenly called her a dude. ;P Even MORE reason to share the love- geek chicks RULE!

“The House Education and Labor Committee unanimously passed the College Opportunity and Affordability Act of 2007. Among other things, the COAA would require colleges and universities to adopt strict antipiracy policies and possibly offer students access to subscription-based music services like Napster.”

This could effectively place the RIAA and others in bed with them in control of college access to those who need it most. It is no secret that the majority of RIAA accusations and demands have been made to individuals who are more likely to settle or cave in to the demands rather than fight in out in court due to financial stature.

An earlier post at ArsTechnica states:

“A massive education bill (747-page PDF) introduced into Congress contains a provision that would force colleges and universities to offer “technology-based deterrents” to file-sharing under the pain of losing all federal financial aid. Section 494 of the College Opportunity and Affordability Act of 2007 is entitled “Campus-Based Digital Theft Prevention” that could have just as easily been called “Motion Picture and Recording Industry Subsidies,” as it could force schools into signing up for subscription-based services like Napster and Rhapsody.”

This bill represents several problems:

1. Even with special grants, preventing file sharing on a college network will involve large expenses for the purchase of technology and additional staffing. Students frequently use their own personal devices on wired and wifi college networks. Scanning traffic for digital signatures should not be the responsibility of the college.
2. Education is the number one priority of an educational institution. Safeguards for health and safety on campus are services that ensure access to education. Preventing file sharing does not fall under services that ensure access to education. Implementing technology to prevent file sharing on college owned equipment is already in place in most, if not all colleges. Policing student devices crosses that line. Holding a college to student’s personal devices and/or personal activities is similar to revoking financial aid to a college if a student is caught shoplifting.
3. College costs are rising and federal financial aid assists financially deserving students in their pursuit of higher education that might be unattainable otherwise.
4. Forcing an educational institution to purchase access to a subscription based commercial media service to avoid penalties is unacceptable.
5. To take education away from any person because of the possibility of sharing material that is protected under copyright is unacceptable.

This is a threat to revoke funding if an institution of higher education does not take enough precautions to prevent the possibility of illegal file sharing. Who will be the organization policing the policies and precautions in place at the colleges? The RIAA? Contact your congress person today and take action. This poses a dangerous precedent.

On October 15th, bloggers around the web will unite to put a single important issue on everyone’s mind – the environment. Every blogger will post about the environment in their own way and relating to their own topic. Our aim is to get everyone talking towards a better future.

Blogging on three blogs today means I need three topics since I would really rather not just repost the same snippet everywhere. Three blogs, three different focuses, one general idea. I came across an email from Eco-Libris about replanting trees for every book you read and immediately found my topic for Linuxchic.net.

The concept from Eco-Libris is simple; books are made of paper, paper comes from trees, trees must be replanted to be able to continue enjoying books. Their service is like buying green credits. If you read ten books, you can plant ten trees for ten dollars. The more trees you plant, the bigger the discount (kind of like buying trees in bulk). Can’t beat that with a stick.

Eco-Libris plants the trees you purchase in developing countries. Local residents play a part in the planting and the trees are located in areas that need them. Planting new trees provide benefits such as carbon dioxide absorption, soil and water conservation, avalanche control, and desertification prevention. Besides the warm fuzzies you get inside by participating in the cause, Eco-Libris also gives you a sticker made from recycled paper to place on each book you balance out.

As an avid reader my favorite way to recycle books has been to leave them in the wild after registering them with BookCrossing.com. BookCrossing is like social networking for books. Once you have registered your book, it receives a unique ID. You can buy or print labels that include instructions for the finder of you book so that they may return to the site and leave a message about your book. It has been a load of fun to tag my books then leave them  at malls, libraries, stores and colleges. The most satisfying part of recycling this way has been when someone logs into BookCrossing.com and reports that they found the book. Sharing the love of reading couldn’t get much more fun.

“About 178,480 women in the United States will be found to have invasive breast cancer in 2007. About 40,460 women will die from the disease this year. Right now there are about two and a half million breast cancer survivors in the United States.

“The chance of a woman having invasive breast cancer some time during her life is about 1 in 8. The chance of dying from breast cancer is about 1 in 35. Breast cancer death rates are going down.”

-excerpt from the American Cancer Society  

Here are some things you can do:

• Get regular exams and screenings. Learn more about the importance of early detection and sign up for free mammogram reminders via email.
• Learn more about breast cancer and share what you have learned with others.
• Become a volunteer, donate money, or participate in Making Strides Against Breast Cancer.

No free time or cash? Volunteer your website and go Pink for October.

In response to the RIAA and MPAA’s campaign against file-sharing, the University of Kansas has announced a stringent policy for students found sharing copyrighted content on the university network. Students fingered for file-sharing would be kicked off of the residence hall network, although they would still be able to use campus computer labs.

A brief notice on the University of Kansas ResNet site explains the university’s new position very succinctly. “If you are caught downloading copyrighted material, you will lose your ResNet privileges forever,” reads the notice. “No second notices, no excuses, no refunds. One violation and your ResNet internet access is gone for as long as you reside on campus.” Presumably, the University is referring to illegally downloaded copyrighted material, as there is plenty of copyrighted material that can be downloaded legally.

Read the full article at Ars Technica

“Under a ruling this month by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, such surveillance — which does not capture the content of the communications — can be conducted without a wiretap warrant, because internet users have no “reasonable expectation of privacy” in the data when using the internet.”

Digging around in this ruling, I find information regarding IP addresses and routing info in email address headers. According to the “secret spyware” story.

“Sanders wrote that the spyware program gathers a wide range of information, including the computer’s IP address; MAC address; open ports; a list of running programs; the operating system type, version and serial number; preferred internet browser and version; the computer’s registered owner and registered company name; the current logged-in user name and the last-visited URL. “

Now I am left asking, how the heck does this apply to installing software on a person’s computer and tracking information such as programs used and users logged in? This is like looking through someone’s underwear drawer when your warrant says the closet.

You will notice that I put the word Internet in parenthesis because once you are snooping around on the computer’s activities, it is no longer just the “Internet” user with the privacy issue. Monitoring offline applications is not the same as monitoring online activities nor is it monitoring visited URLs or the IP addresses found in an email header. I am left a tad bit confused as to how the ruling applies to the logic used by the FBI to install the “spyware” on the computer other than they are counting on the accused and the Courts lacking the technical information to see the difference. I lock down my system as much as possible, therefore I DO have a reasonable expectation of privacy for many of these items that this program reports on.

What do you think?

But contrary to some published reports traversing the blogosphere on Thursday and Friday, SoundExchange, the nonprofit group charged with collecting the payments, has not made any sort of blanket pledge to delay enforcing the contentious new Webcaster payments established earlier this year by the U.S. Copyright Royalty Board, according to spokesman Richard Ades.

“There is a misunderstanding, and SoundExchange is making it very clear that everybody is expected to comply with the law,” Ades told CNET News.com Friday.

The CRB ruling at issue requires Internet radio operators to pay additional fees to SoundExchange, which passes them on to artists and record labels, retroactive to 2006 and through 2010. Webcasters opposed to the new rules say the changes could drive up their mandatory payments by as much as 300 percent for larger entities and 1,200 percent for smaller ones, arguing such increases could put them out of business.

Get all the details by reading the full article here…

Whether you are a blogger, a photographer or a filmmaker, it is not always clear where your freedom to use content publicly might be legally questioned. When it comes to using copyrighted material, you have more rights than you think.

Whether you are a blogger, a photographer or a filmmaker, it is not always clear where your freedom to use content publicly might be legally questioned. When it comes to using copyrighted material, you have more rights than you think.

Fair use is the right, in some circumstances, to quote copyrighted material without asking permission or paying for it. It is a crucial feature of copyright law and what keeps copyright from being censorship. You can invoke fair use when the value to the public of what you are saying outweighs the cost to the private owner of the copyright,” according to the Center for Social Media site.

Read more (scroll down for the easy to navigate Q&A)

Microsoft’s promised patent indemnification to paying SUSE users specifically excludes open source software like Wine, OpenExchange, StarOffice and OpenOffice by name.

It also excludes:

• “office productivity applications (word processing, spreadsheets, presentation software etc.)…that are hosted by or running on a computer acting as a server for a connected client device” (think Google);

• “business application designed, marketed and used to meet the data processing requirements of particular business functions, financial forecasting, financial reporting, customer relationship management and supply chain management” (think salesforce.com);

• “mail transfer agents (a k a e-mail servers)”;

• “unified communications”;

• and video games consoles, console games, video game applications designed to run on a computer and online video gaming services like Xbox Live.

The implication is you can run SUSE free of patent concerns but you’d better be darn careful what you run on top of it. Otherwise you’re good for six years after the last of the covered patents expires.

Um…yeah. Go read the entire article Ajax World Magazine….

Shuttleworth was responding to a recent Fortune magazine interview in which senior Microsoft figures sent shockwaves through the software industry by declaring that Linux and other open source software violates 235 Microsoft patents.

But while Microsoft is using familiar tactics to put the fear into Linux users, Shuttleworth argued open source and Microsoft are ultimately on the same side of the software patent issue.

“I’m pretty certain that, within a few years, Microsoft themselves will be strong advocates against software patents,” Shuttleworth wrote. “Microsoft is irrevocably committed to shipping new software every year, and software patents represent landmines in their roadmap which they are going to step on, like it or not, with increasing regularity.”

Microsoft makes the “perfect target” for software patent lawsuits, and the company will pay more for such suits every year until they finally threaten its business, Shuttleworth said.

More at ComputerWorld UK… 

Read the rest of the article at Ars Technica… 

“To meet the global challenges of IP crime, our criminal laws must be kept updated,” Gonzales said during a speech before the U.S. Chamber of Commerce in Washington on Monday.

The Bush administration is throwing its support behind a proposal called the Intellectual Property Protection Act of 2007, which is likely to receive the enthusiastic support of the movie and music industries, and would represent the most dramatic rewrite of copyright law since a 2005 measure dealing with prerelease piracy.

Continue reading this article at CNet News Blog 

Justin Steinman, Novell director of product marketing for Linux and open source, has dismissed Microsoft’s claims that there are infringements of Microsoft intellectual property, in the Linux operating system.

Novell has an arrangement with Microsoft in which the two vendors agree never to sue each other’s customers over patent infringement, but Steinman was adamant. “I want to make it extremely clear. We do not think there are any IP violations in Linux,” he declared

 Continue the article at ComputerWorld UK

read more | digg story