nVidia ends GeForce Partner Program

[Razor01]

1 hour ago, Kamjam21xx said:

Well no, but atleast adhere to the standards elsewhere in this country.

 

Big pharma isnt the problem, the FDA is.

But still... we still lead the world. If our pharmaceutical companies dont make, you generally wont get it, and due to FDA regulations you get half as many life saving drugs at the moment. They have made healthcare worse worldwide.

 

That might have changed this year or last year, idk. But for a long time, we have lead the world on this. So even with FDA regulation they do fine. But yeah it takes 14 years and billions of dollars to comply with them on a per drug basis. Like just sayin i get that FDA makes things crazy expensive.

 

Nvidia needs to be held accoutable for the shitty shit they do.

 

Side note: my stepmom use to audit all of the hospitals in michigan, so i hear a fairbit from her. But back to graphics cards lol.

 

They will be if there was/is anything illegal going on.  But presuming there is a problem automatically is a problem on its own.

[Kamjam21xx]

20 minutes ago, Razor01 said:

 

They will be if there was/is anything illegal going on.  But presuming there is a problem automatically is a problem on its own.

Well i dont believe that at all. Its if they can prove it, companies have dont things like shred documents to avoid legal troubles in the past. 

 

People arent saying fine nvidia, theyre saying investigate nvidia.

[Razor01]

yeah which costs a butt load of money, just to investigate, if there is any credence to start an investigation, they will.    That money comes from our pocket in the form of taxes.  They better have enough info before they start anything otherwise its just a waste of money.

[Kamjam21xx]

6 minutes ago, Razor01 said:

yeah which costs a butt load of money, just to investigate, if there is any credence to start an investigation, they will.    That money comes from our pocket in the form of taxes.  They better have enough info before they start anything otherwise its just a waste of money.

Well with the polling, im sure theres plenty of moneu for it. 

[Razor01]

23 minutes ago, Kamjam21xx said:

Well with the polling, im sure theres plenty of moneu for it. 

polling doesn't matter, it comes from taxes, if they can't see a 100% win, they won't do it, those people directly report to the Senate, if the Senate doesn't win, those senator's are out of the job and then those guys at the FTC are too lol.

 

Just watch the Senate hearing on Facebook, they tread lightly till they can actually find something.  Can't piss off a multi billion dollar corporation and not expect bad things to happen if they don't find anything....

[leadeater]

5 hours ago, pas008 said:

if you think they are the same product you must be missing something cause they compare to another product but they technically are using modified formula or missing something in the formula

many drugs and recipes are copyrighted

thats like saying mouthwash that compares to listerine is same formula same with doritos chips

same goes for perfumes and colognes

they are a new product that compares

gpus/laptops/mobos are still intel/nvidia/amd based products

For drugs no, the chemical formula is not changed otherwise it is not the same drug and then won't do what it's supposed to and will no longer be certified for use. Generic brand drugs are a legal case where other companies are allowed to copy the name brand where they would not normally be allowed. When there are differences it's only in the active ingredient concentration.

 

For the food example yes there are products that are literally the same thing made in the same factory with different brand labels on them, breads and jams are common for this and so are potato chips. Meat is another, same butchery supplying competing supermarket chains.

[pas008]

1 minute ago, leadeater said:

For drugs no, the chemical formula is not changed otherwise it is not the same drug and then won't do what it's supposed to and will no longer be certified for use. Generic brand drugs are a legal case where other companies are allowed to copy the name brand where they would not normally be allowed. When there are differences it's only in the active ingredient concentration.

 

For the food example yes there are products that are literally the same thing made in the same factory with different brand labels on them, breads and jams are common for this and so are potato chips. Meat is another, same butchery supplying competing supermarket chains.

not on patented shit unless its licensed to another company

[leadeater]

22 minutes ago, pas008 said:

not on patented shit unless its licensed to another company

And what exactly is patented? Before you continue I've been in to bread and jam making factories and my town has the distribution centers for all the supermarkets in the lower half of my country, I know from actually talking to the people making the stuff and watching it get made. Potato chips are not patented, some flavors might be but not all, in fact few. You can't just patent stuff willy nilly.

 

For drugs that is a different and more complicated matter, the original IP hold gets exclusive share of the market for a time and if and only if that drug is deemed to be necessary  for cheaper access it is specifically listed as being allowed to be made as a generic drug but only after the exclusive period has passed.

[pas008]

4 minutes ago, leadeater said:

And what exactly is patented? Before you continue I've been in to bread and jam making factories and my town has the distribution centers for all the supermarkets in the lower half of my country, I know from actually talking to the people making the stuff and watching it get made. Potato chips are not patented, some flavors might be but not all, in fact few. You can't just patent stuff willy nilly.

 

For drugs that is a different and more complicated matter, the original IP hold gets exclusive share of the market for a time and if and only if that drug is deemed to be necessary  for cheaper access it is specifically listed as being allowed to be made as a generic drug but only after the exclusive period has passed.

of course many items arent patented

you know coke isnt patented they just keep it secret, patent troll waiting to happen lol

 

but there are many items out there that are patented and trademarked for the security

[mr moose]

5 minutes ago, leadeater said:

And what exactly is patented? Before you continue I've been in to bread and jam making factories and my town has the distribution centers for all the supermarkets in the lower half of my country, I know from actually talking to the people making the stuff and watching it get made. Potato chips are not patented, some flavors might be but not all, in fact few. You can't just patent stuff willy nilly.

 

For drugs that is a different and more complicated matter, the original IP hold gets exclusive share of the market for a time and if and only if that drug is deemed to be necessary  for cheaper access it is specifically listed as being allowed to be made as a generic drug but only after the exclusive period has passed.

Even if there was a patent, trademark or some form of copyright on potato chips/flavoring, usually the company that makes them also make the other brands so they already would own the rights to manufacture and sell said product.  This is how the supermarket brand/generic brand products come to be without any court cases.  The supermarket asks for tenders to manufacture a product for them.  If Nestle win the bid to make homebrand chocolate milk drink, it could be identical to Milo or it could be bottom of the barrel or it could even be the seconds from the batch, but it still comes without any branding or IP issues because it is made by nestle (they aren't going to sue themselves).

 

When it comes to pharmaceuticals there is also the whole other side of legality and efficacy trials.  Every approved drug has a very specific chemical composition, as soon as one constituent changes it no longer has approval.  This puts the whole concept of branding in a different category to regular products.

[leadeater]

20 minutes ago, pas008 said:

of course many items arent patented

you know coke isnt patented they just keep it secret, patent troll waiting to happen lol

 

but there are many items out there that are patented and trademarked for the security

And how does this comment relate to my original comment? There are many many things with different brand labels on them that are the same thing across pretty much every industry, it's not unique to the computer industry nor did they start it.

[WMGroomAK]

1 hour ago, leadeater said:

For drugs that is a different and more complicated matter, the original IP hold gets exclusive share of the market for a time and if and only if that drug is deemed to be necessary  for cheaper access it is specifically listed as being allowed to be made as a generic drug but only after the exclusive period has passed.

Just to toss out an example, look at Diphenhydramine (aka: Benadryl, ZZZQuil and many other OTC allergy meds.)

[Arika]

[Drak3]

1 hour ago, WMGroomAK said:

Just to toss out an example, look at Diphenhydramine (aka: Benadryl, ZZZQuil and many other OTC allergy meds.)

Another example: Cummins Engines.

 

AKA RAM 2500+ amd Titan X D.

And Sterling Trucks, which are just Ram 4500/5500 Chassis cabs rebranded.

[pas008]

2 hours ago, leadeater said:

And how does this comment relate to my original comment? There are many many things with different brand labels on them that are the same thing across pretty much every industry, it's not unique to the computer industry nor did they start it.

not when it comes to both licenses and trademarks involved

 

fyi I get busy at times

 

remember these partners are licensing nvidia's trademarks too which does have guidelines also which can easily be rewritten

[leadeater]

3 minutes ago, pas008 said:

not when it comes to both licenses and trademarks involved

 

fyi I get busy at times

 

remember these partners are licensing nvidia's trademarks too which does have guidelines also which can easily be rewritten

Yes but your original comment was there is no other markets like GPUs and AIBs, there is which was my original reply to you. I'm not exactly sure where this is supposed to be going but the world is full of branded products manufactured by or supplied parts from another company who many not retain any naming rights of the product at all or only partial, like with GPUs.

 

What was newer with GPP was Nvidia bringing in tighter control of the AIB product naming, not just mandating that GeForce must be in the product name and on the box and the box must have the Nvidia green on it and the Geforce logo. Previous agreements didn't give Nvidia the ability to say what can have ROG on it or STRIX or what every else, that was up to the AIB and those brands belong to the AIB. Even under the now defunct GPP those AIB brands still belonged to them but they had a signed agreement which put conditions on how they could be used on Nvidia products, not how the AIB could use them out right.

 

Nvidia doesn't own the end product or any of the AIB's IP but they can create agreements which puts controls around their products they are supplying and the end product it is used in.

 

What Nvidia cannot do is have an agreement that breaches any consumer or trade laws, whether GPP did or didn't do that I don't know or particularly care that much about it. I will never agree that Nvidia should be allowed to create agreements that have such controls over existing AIB branding though, I have no issue with branding requirements themselves but execution and context matters. This is why my stance has always been if Nvidia wanted something like that then they should be using their marketing money along with AIBs to create new branding exclusive for Nvidia products, not usurp existing branding. And yes I'm fully aware that it may have been the AIB's choice to take that existing branding and use it to comply with the agreement with the end result of excluding non Nvidia products from it but that doesn't make the agreement right or the effects of it.

[Guanzo]

Asuck always sucks. Worst company in the world. 

[pas008]

44 minutes ago, leadeater said:

Yes but your original comment was there is no other markets like GPUs and AIBs, there is which was my original reply to you. I'm not exactly sure where this is supposed to be going but the world is full of branded products manufactured by or supplied parts from another company who many not retain any naming rights of the product at all or only partial, like with GPUs.

 

What was newer with GPP was Nvidia bringing in tighter control of the AIB product naming, not just mandating that GeForce must be in the product name and on the box and the box must have the Nvidia green on it and the Geforce logo. Previous agreements didn't give Nvidia the ability to say what can have ROG on it or STRIX or what every else, that was up to the AIB and those brands belong to the AIB. Even under the now defunct GPP those AIB brands still belonged to them but they had a signed agreement which put conditions on how they could be used on Nvidia products, not how the AIB could use them out right.

 

Nvidia doesn't own the end product or any of the AIB's IP but they can create agreements which puts controls around their products they are supplying and the end product it is used in.

 

What Nvidia cannot do is have an agreement that breaches any consumer or trade laws, whether GPP did or didn't do that I don't know or particularly care that much about it. I will never agree that Nvidia should be allowed to create agreements that have such controls over existing AIB branding though, I have no issue with branding requirements themselves but execution and context matters. This is why my stance has always been if Nvidia wanted something like that then they should be using their marketing money along with AIBs to create new branding exclusive for Nvidia products, not usurp existing branding. And yes I'm fully aware that it may have been the AIB's choice to take that existing branding and use it to comply with the agreement with the end result of excluding non Nvidia products from it but that doesn't make the agreement right or the effects of it.

disagree with bolded

it is nvidias product manufacturer takes care of manufacturing of a nvidia product hence nvidia geforce name and trademarks lol

thats like saying foxconn owns apple products because they produce them,

and taking the name/sub brands we have no clue but if nvidia was giving mdf and other perks they are simply buying it out pretty much

 

but in the end we can agree to disagree because we will prolly never get to see anything else on this

and if we could see ndgpp

nondisclosure version of gpp,

shit this all could have happened if they jsut did it and with nondisclosure agreement in first place and never publicly announced the program

[leadeater]

43 minutes ago, pas008 said:

it is nvidias product manufacturer takes care of manufacturing of a nvidia product hence nvidia geforce name and trademarks lol

No that is not correct, it's not Nvidia's manufacturing company. Asus or any other company is independent from Nvidia or AMD, they enter in to supply agreements to make products. Part of that agreement is to place Nvidia branding on the product. Having Nvidia's logo on it does not make it their product, like Intel's logo on a Dell laptop doesn't make it Intel's laptop.

 

You have a very odd way of interpreting branding and logos, why do you think that signifies any type of actual product ownership? 

 

It is not an Nvidia product, the only "Nvidia" GPU that you can buy is off Nvidia's website.

 

43 minutes ago, pas008 said:

thats like saying foxconn owns apple products because they produce them,

What I said is nothing like this at all, read it again you didn't understand what was being said or read it how you wanted to. Also the relationship between Foxconn and Apple is not the same as Nvidia and AIB's either and the manufacturing agreement is different.

 

43 minutes ago, pas008 said:

and taking the name/sub brands we have no clue but if nvidia was giving mdf and other perks they are simply buying it out pretty much

Which I do not agree with, you can but I don't. Like I said if they want something exclusive create something new. Nvidia GPUs are not the sole product under ROG or other AIB brands and many companies contributed MDF to get those brands to where they are now, this is why I do not agree with them being used only for Nvidia GPUs because they are gaining from other competing companies investments, and no not just AMD's.

 

43 minutes ago, pas008 said:

and if we could see ndgpp

nondisclosure version of gpp,

shit this all could have happened if they jsut did it and with nondisclosure agreement in first place and never publicly announced the program

There already was a non disclosure clause in GPP, why do you think no one will talk about it.

[pas008]

 

 

Its a nvidia based product made by many manufacturers just like many companies do 

 

 

http://www.nvidia.com/object/support_aic.html

 

 

Trademark rules that can be changed easily to include non competitor naming

 

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://images.nvidia.com/content/includes/gcr/pdf/NVIDIA-Trademark-and-Logo-Usage-Guidelines.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwjBytLuzffaAhWtm-AKHbl1ApwQFjADegQICBAB&usg=AOvVaw2PyR2AMVo1MPXAzg0iegJf

 

Was non disclosure but they announced it publicly which they didn't need to do

Everyone got butthurt like corsairs logo

[leadeater]

2 minutes ago, pas008 said:

Its a nvidia based product made by many manufacturers just like many companies do 

http://www.nvidia.com/object/support_aic.html

 

Trademark rules that can be changed easily to include non competitor naming

 

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://images.nvidia.com/content/includes/gcr/pdf/NVIDIA-Trademark-and-Logo-Usage-Guidelines.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwjBytLuzffaAhWtm-AKHbl1ApwQFjADegQICBAB&usg=AOvVaw2PyR2AMVo1MPXAzg0iegJf

 

Was non disclosure but they announced it publicly which they didn't need to do

Everyone got butthurt like corsairs logo

And a Dell laptop with an Intel CPU is an Intel based laptop but it's not an Intel product is it. Dell is still required to put Intel brands an logos on the laptop due to a signed agreement but it's still a Dell laptop.

 

And if a member of the tech media never got access to the GPP contract or AMD never found out about it we wouldn't be talking about it now and Nvidia would never have made a blog post about it either. What you said Nvidia could do was exactly what they were doing, people found out.

[RoyalGamer1]

maybe im late here but what is GPP and the "goal" and why is everyone happy it is gone?

[pas008]

20 minutes ago, leadeater said:

And a Dell laptop with an Intel CPU is an Intel based laptop but it's not an Intel product is it. Dell is still required to put Intel brands an logos on the laptop due to a signed agreement but it's still a Dell laptop.

 

And if a member of the tech media never got access to the GPP contract or AMD never found out about it we wouldn't be talking about it now and Nvidia would never have made a blog post about it either. What you said Nvidia could do was exactly what they were doing, people found out.

But they still have to follow Intel's products ip and regulations on them products

Fyi dell gets their laptops from odm

Original design manufacturer

Just for https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Original_design_manufacturer

[leadeater]

3 minutes ago, pas008 said:

But they still have to follow Intel's products ip and regulations on them products

Fyi dell gets their laptops from odm

Original design manufacturer

Just for https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Original_design_manufacturer

Yes I know this, but it's still a Dell laptop isn't it. That's the point, it's a Dell laptop, a Asus Graphics card, a Corsair T1 Gaming chair.

[pas008]

21 minutes ago, leadeater said:

Yes I know this, but it's still a Dell laptop isn't it. That's the point, it's a Dell laptop, a Asus Graphics card, a Corsair T1 Gaming chair.

Did you read on ip in that link?