Some will recall the contortions the Professor at Islington Technical College went through to insist that Starbucks really was dodging taxes. Despite their actually, you know, losing money? Losing money even after we reversed everything they were supposed to be doing that was tax dodging.
One such contortion was that there should be no royalty paid. For, of course, intellectual property is only just a tax dodge, it has no economic reality at all:
Switzerland’s Nestlé is paying $7.15bn to market Starbucks’ out-of-shop products as the world’s largest food and drinks group ramps up its US and global coffee expansion plans.
Dunno about you bit I’d call that 7,150,000,000 bits of economic reality myself.
Er…wouldn’t that be 57,200,000,000 bits?
Just offering my two bits’ worth, as it were.
It was 57.2t bits when you wrote your message but now it’s only 14k bits.
Sorry, now it’s 1,508t bits.
Who knew that an internationally-recognised set of registered trade marks could have actual value, eh? That would justify paying billions for a license?
Well, anyone with the slightest hint of knowledge about trademarks.
Which discounts Spudda.
Given Ritchie was the accountant for the company that licensed Trivial Pursuit and the founder of the tax dodging factory in Ireland that made the folding boards, you’d have thought he’d have seen the value of IP.
I give no quarter in this dispute, Andrew.
Can I photocopy his book and sell it on Amazon under my name, for 25% of the price? If he objects, is he tax dodging?
Oh look, make a post from an alternate identity on Ritchie’s blog saying Labour is sunk due to anti-semitism. It’s deleted. Ritchie really was just scouting for ideas when he went to Dachau.