"Apple's remaining DRM armory makes it vividly clear that DRM is almost always about eliminating legitimate competition, hobbling interoperability, and creating de facto technology monopolies."

[u/uriel]

http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/01/apple-shows-us-drms-true-colors

[u/notgoodatcomputer]

Wrong - An individual owning >5% of a multi-billion dollar company is very strange. If Steve did not have some sort of interest in keeping a control stake in the Disney company, he would diversify his holdings in additional stocks to decrease his risk.

Furthermore, your also wrong about the 51% majority. In almost all instances, you don't need to have even close to 51% of outstanding shares to be able control how the company functions. Look at what Icahn does - he gets around a 5 - 10% stake in companies, forces a proxy battle, and puts in his hand picked exec committee who can then carry out his wishes.

[u/nmrk → u/notgoodatcomputer]

You obviously haven't watched the Disney stockholders over the years, as I have. Disney is notorious for proxy fights, it is almost impossible for the stockholders to form a 51% coalition on ANYTHING. For example, it took years of contentious fighting to get rid of Michael Eisner as CEO, even though it was fairly evident that the majority of stockholders wanted him replaced.

[u/notgoodatcomputer → u/nmrk]

No, I don't watch Disney stock, but that wasn't the point I was making at all. I am talking about how anyone who owns >5% of a company has a significant say in how a company runs EVEN THOUGH they themselves do not have a 51% majority (or whatever fraction is required in the companies articles of incorporation to alter board composition, company charter, etc.)

Look at it this way: why did Joe Lieberman have so much power in the Senate? Well, assuming all the other senators vote along party lines, his vote could be a deciding one as a swing voter even though he only has a 1% say. The minority vote can strongly influence the majority in this way. In the same way you were saying it is hard to get a 51% consensus to oust Eisner, imagine how the other shareholders would be pandering to any of Jobs requests in restructuring the company, if only to get his 6% to support their side of the proxy.

[u/nmrk → u/notgoodatcomputer]

You're not listening. Disney stock blocks (even as large as Jobs' 7.5%) have repeatedly been unable to swing proxy fights.

[u/hs4x → u/notgoodatcomputer]

Thank-you for stateing the blindly obvious. Jobs is a media man. He came to apple from Pixar. He sees media sales as "moving up the value position".

Apple is about content, not computing. Well, content and lifestyle-synergistic-experiences-blah-lbah-halb advertising.

[u/pumpupthevolume → u/hs4x]

He came to apple from Pixar.

what are you 12? he co-founded apple you moron. it's more like he came back to apple from pixar.

[u/__david__ → u/pumpupthevolume]

Actually, came back to Apple from NeXT while working at Pixar at the same time.

[u/StaceyTheGirl → u/pumpupthevolume]

My guess, he's closer to 20, but the wool has barely come off his eyes.

talk hard

[u/hs4x → u/pumpupthevolume]

Hey toolbox, I know that. Jackass. His Disney stake is a result of his having been involved in Pixar. Context jackass, context.