Re:Apple seeks to trademark “startup” in Australia
by rimantas on Wednesday August 28, 2013 @02:27AM
(#6288318)
As if there is anything not shady. Just definition of shady vary among the people.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Apple seeks to trademark “startup” in Australia
by adamnemecek on Wednesday August 28, 2013 @02:32AM
(#6288328)
What does this comment even mean? Questioning semantics to undermine the parent comment's argument? Quaint strategy.
Re:Apple seeks to trademark “startup” in Australia
by rimantas on Wednesday August 28, 2013 @03:16AM
(#6288463)
That commen means: you can take any company and find that its practices are shady. Nobody questions semantics.
You think Apple is shady, I think Google is no less shady, maybe more, given their business model.
Re:Apple seeks to trademark “startup” in Australia
by adamnemecek on Wednesday August 28, 2013 @03:30AM
(#6288508)
Well this interpretation is roughly on par. How does the fact that Google might employ shady practices as well really add anything to the discussion? Does that absolve Apple from any wrongdoings?