First sale doctrine only applies if you don't modify the thing (for trademark anyway).

Don't most places that mod cars just sell the modifications and the labor to apply them, not fully modified cars? Shelby doesn't count because of the deep affiliation with manufacturers.

Regardless: yeah this is crap.

brephophagist wrote: Wed Jul 28, 2021 4:00 pm First sale doctrine only applies if you don't modify the thing (for trademark anyway).

I think it's ok so long as the consumer is aware of the modifications and doesn't believe that the product is as the manufacturer intended it. Nike was arguing that people who bought the shoes believed the company had approved of the modifications.

Nike probably has a valid beef, but fuck them.

I grew up on a farm. Customization was the name of the game. Dad welded god-knows-what onto the back of the Massey in order to improve the design flaws of implement like sprayers, seed drills, etc. This may not be an apples to apples anecdote, but I think it's relevant. The Right To Repair bill is something long in the making, and John Deere is none too thrilled about it.

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/202 ... diy-fixes/

kicker_of_elves wrote: Thu Jul 29, 2021 9:37 am I grew up on a farm. Customization was the name of the game. Dad welded god-knows-what onto the back of the Massey in order to improve the design flaws of implement like sprayers, seed drills, etc. This may not be an apples to apples anecdote, but I think it's relevant. The Right To Repair bill is something long in the making, and John Deere is none too thrilled about it.

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/202 ... diy-fixes/

Right to Repair policy will be part of a necessary move toward addressing climate change. Our culture needs to end the practice of constant turnover of hardware and planned obsolescence & disposability if we have any hope of truly addressing the root overconsumption that's contributing to climate change and habitat destruction.

Manufacturers should be designing parts replacement and piecemeal upgrades into an extended product lifecycle.

I've got a 5+ year old iPhone 6s that I'm putting a new battery in and riding out until the iOS updates bloat it out into uselessness. With any luck, I could squeeze another 5 years from that piece of shit.

Too many people act like they give a fuck, and then look to someone else to provide a "solution" that hopefully doesn't involve personal sacrifice of any kind. It doesn't work that way. A person can't tool around in an F-150, getting a new phone every year and running the goddamn AC when it's only 75 out and then act like they care about any of this shit. So much lip service all around.....[devolves into old man rant].

Geiginni wrote: Fri Jul 30, 2021 1:52 pm
Manufacturers should be designing parts replacement and piecemeal upgrades into an extended product lifecycle.

I've got a 5+ year old iPhone 6s that I'm putting a new battery in and riding out until the iOS updates bloat it out into uselessness. With any luck, I could squeeze another 5 years from that piece of shit.

From June to October, my daily driver is a 71 year old car. Yeah, it's fossil fuels. But it sure as hell isn't new.

Cars need a computer attached most of the time to 'read' the ECU. In a post apocalytptic world, they'd be the ones left at the side of the road.

I absolutely detest the built in obsolescence that pervades modern society.

Had to take a lawnmower to a repair place the other day, he said "you might as well throw it in a skip and buy a new one".

Once a product is yours and you wanna do some wacky shit to it and resell it, whatever. You paid for it. As long as you are selling/disclosing as an aftermarket product, I see no problem.

Intellectual property is bad.

Maybe force people to give credit when they quote or sample. That's the ethical limit. Tapes didn't kill records, CD-Rs didn't kill CDs, and the same investment groups that were taking 80% of the profits from records, tapes and CDs are now taking 99% of the profits from streaming, because intellectual property is a thing.