Comodo - if you are reading this, you lost about 3000 USD worth of business from me. And someone else is going to gain the same. Drop this nonsense. It helps no one.
Why not send them an short and direct email?
Defending Our Brand
191–200 of 275 posts
Re: Defending Our Brand
#192Re: Defending Our Brand
#193Earlier quoted context omitted.
I disagree. I think it's important to show that multiple people decided to donate because of this single comment. It's prompted me to donate to Let's Encrypt.
I also donated I think the feeling of missing out helped sway the decision.
I just donated, but only because the thread got this deep.
Re: Defending Our Brand
#194Earlier quoted context omitted.
I am on LetsEncrypt's side to defend their branding. However, Comodo's intent is understandably clear: you take away my business by giving away free certs I screw you in your branding. (not that I agree with this tactic.)
It's a bit like a buggy whip manufacturer registering a trademark on the word 'ford' at the introduction of the model T. Understandable, but not permissible.
They're both bad faith registrations, "understandable" doesn't enter into it.
Re: Defending Our Brand
#195Those bastards. I tried emailing sales@comodo.com but their mailing server falsely bounced my message saying there was a virus attached (I use anti-virus on my mail server.)
I called them and told their tech support guy about their broken mail server, and told him to check out letsencrypt.org and see how his company is trying to infringe on trademarks to bully their open-source competition, and that he should find a better employer.
Re: Defending Our Brand
#196Learning this, I will not renew my certs with Comodo. This is childish behaviour on Comodos part. If it helps I'll advise any companies I consult to do the same until this changes. Money is the only thing this company will understand.
It's quite a bit more than being childish. They're basically saying F U to the security community and to people who want a secure Internet. How is this company still alive after their numerous security breaches/issue ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comodo_Group#Controversies ) and then on top of those, this thing? They need to go out of business.
It's troubling that an ostensibly security-oriented company would seek to muddy the waters like this and reduce the reliability and integrity of the marketplace.
Re: Defending Our Brand
#197Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's one thing to have rules, but don't confuse rule following with culture. Culture is emergent, and not something that is policed into place.
HN has a culture of pointing out that obvious, boring jokes have no place here. There's a constant struggle by people to introduce them, but (amongst others) those of us who watched Slashdot flush itself down the toilet of shitty humor are going to police the site because it's what we want.
Isn't it fair to say that the field of computer science has (up until recently, apparently) distinguished itself with its corny humor, dorkiness, and resulting sense of humility? I feel like puns and bad jokes had generally been a special part of the culture of early technologists. It's a little sad to see that give way to a kind of self-important seriousness.
Re: Defending Our Brand
#198Re: Defending Our Brand
#199I'm pretty sure the lawyer would have known about letsencrypt.org and their Let's Encrypt project before filing this. So that being said, reading the fine print of what the lawyer had to sign in order to submit the application, shouldn't the lawyer be vulnerable to perjury charges? Excerpt from http://tsdr.uspto.gov/documentviewer?caseId=sn86790719&docId... : The signatory believes that: if the applicant is filing th…
shouldn't the lawyer be vulnerable to perjury charges?
18 U.S.C. § 1001 isn't perjury, it's false statements, the same charge as lying to the FBI (Scooter Libby, Rod Blagojevich, Bernie Madoff, etc.). It can still result in prison, though!
Re: Defending Our Brand
#200Earlier quoted context omitted.
HN has a culture of pointing out that obvious, boring jokes have no place here. There's a constant struggle by people to introduce them, but (amongst others) those of us who watched Slashdot flush itself down the toilet of shitty humor are going to police the site because it's what we want.
Isn't it fair to say that the field of computer science has (up until recently, apparently) distinguished itself with its corny humor, dorkiness, and resulting sense of humility? I feel like puns and bad jokes had generally been a special part of the culture of early technologists. It's a little sad to see that give way to a kind of self-important seriousness.
But this isn't the field of computer science, it's HN. HN has developed its own distinct culture, as any long-running online forum does.