The Marmot's Hole

Korea... in Blog Format

Category: IT Korea (page 2 of 16)

Well, that’s a bit disconcerting

I love my Galaxy Note, but I really hope it doesn’t blow up in my pants:

Another Galaxy smartphone has exploded and injured its owner. Bupyeong Fire Station in Incheon on Sunday said a 55-year-old man reported the previous day that his smartphone battery blew up in the pocket of his pants.

The man said he was carrying a Samsung Galaxy Note along with a spare battery in his pocket before they suddenly blew up. He is being treated for second-degree burns to his right thigh.

Can Samsung be cooler than Apple?

That’s what the Korea Times wants to know:

Samsung Electronics is the global leader in mobile phones, televisions and computer memory chips.

However, what the Korean company really wants is to be admired, and by successfully injecting creative input into its smart products in recent years, it finally seems to be earning its stripes as an innovator.

The main source of inspiration in the technology industry in recent years has been Apple, the maker of the revolutionary iPhones and iPads and Samsung’s bitter industry rival.

Look, I know I come off as a Samsung fanboy sometimes, but I’m perfectly willing to concede that Apple is the gold standard of cool. I direct you once again to Milo Yiannopoulos:

Not to be rude, but when was the last time you saw a smouldering hottie merrily chatting away into an Android phone? That’s right, you never have. Because giving in to Android is just another way of advertising that you care more about PHP than people.

Hot people do not use Android. If they’re time-rich, cash-poor hipster cuties, they’ll be sporting that ubiquitous symbol of cool, the iPhone. It’s those apps, man. I don’t understand how some people make it past an artisanal card shop without Instagramming it for the boys back at the agency.
[...]
But they’re also utterly aesthetically insensitive, apparently not realising that every Android device ever made is hideously, hideously, hideously fugly. I mean, seriously: what is wrong with these handset manufacturers? It’s like their design brief was: “create a carbuncle”.

That’s what Samsung is up against. Personally, I like how the newer Samsung models look. At any rate, I don’t think they look like carbuncles. And if you’re tech-oriented and like kick-ass displays (like me), you’re going to like Samsung. But even I have to admit they’re nowhere near the user experience my iMac or iPad are. Is this because TouchWiz still leaves a lot to be desired? I don’t know.

LG pushes Apple into 3rd place in US market / Samsung finally recognized for innovation

So, I take it that iPhone 5 isn’t doing so hot:

LG Electronics has pushed Apple into third place in the North American mobile phone market.

LG rose to second place with a 13 percent share in December, overtaking Apple, which had 12 percent, according to Hong Kong market researcher Counterpoint Research.

LG was in second place in North America until the third quarter of 2011, when it ceded the position to Apple after the release of the iPhone 4S.

And to piss a bit more in Apple’s Wheaties, the Boston Consulting Group has named Samsung the world’s third most innovative company behind Apple and Google. And that’s not good for Apple—said Haydn Shaughnessy at Forbes:

Samsung is an innovator and has risen up the BCG rankings by 8 places. Behind the scenes Samsung invests heavily in its engineers’ innovation capabilities. While we’ve all been watching the court case, Samsung has gone from strength to strength. And is now neck and neck with Apple on revenues. 2013 could be the year we look to Korea for who is defining the future of tech.

I stand by what I said earlier—Seoul is the place where the future will happen.

One of the links in that piece is to a Salon story on how Samsung became the world’s biggest tech company—the part about the Note is instructive:

Consider the phablet. Back in 2011, when Samsung first unveiled the Galaxy Note—a 5.3-inch smartphone that was big enough to be a minitablet, hence the ugly portmanteau—the world’s tech pundits couldn’t stifle their giggles. Was it a phone? Was it a tablet? Was it a joke? Smartphone industry blog Boy Genius Report called the Note “the most useless phone I’ve ever used,” adding: “You will look stupid talking on it, people will laugh at you, and you’ll be unhappy if you buy it.” Gizmodo argued that the Note “isn’t just designed poorly—it’s hardly even designed for humans.” I couldn’t resist joining the chorus. With the Note, I wrote, Samsung was hoping to stoke a certain kind of envy in young men all over the world. The firm was banking on the fact that “when you whip a phone as big as the Galaxy Note out of your pants, some dudes will think you’re a god.”

But the joke’s on me and my smart-ass tech journo colleagues. Confounding our predictions, Samsung sold 10 million Notes in 2012, making it one of the most successful smartphone launches in history. Then, in the fall, Samsung launched the Galaxy Note II, an upgraded version with an even larger screen—and it promptly sold 5 million of them, and is on track to sell 20 million over the course of the year. The Note’s success has spawned a spate of copycats, with phablets becoming the hottest new smartphone category. Over at Quartz, Christopher Mims smartly argues that as ridiculous as it looks, the phablet is becoming the computing device of choice in the developing world. “If your budget is limited, why deal with two different upgrade cycles and two different devices, when you can put all of your money into a single device?” he argues. Mims believes that the Note’s success may even force Apple to build a rival phablet.

Since I switched to the Galaxy Note, I can’t even look at an iPhone without giggling. It’s just so puny, like a shriveled appendage or something.

Chosun Ilbo bitching about South Korea falling behind in the space race

You know who’s really upset about the North Korean missile launch?

The Chosun Ilbo, that’s who.

To be sure, they’re upset about the security lapse. But they’re also upset that according to “experts,” the South now lags seven to 10 years behind the North in space launch development. Which really ticks them off, because the South has 39 times the GDP or the North, 19 times the per capita income, and was ranked the world’s fifth most scientifically competitive nation by the IMD.

The problem, they say, is—wait for it, wait for it—the bilateral missile agreement Seoul has with los Estados Unidos. This agreement, says the Chosun, blocks Korea from not only building long-range missiles, but also developing rockets for space exploration. Even with the Naro project, the has inspected the Agency for Defense Development several times to make sure no missile parts have gone into it. Which, IMHO, is a dick move.

At any rate, the Chosun notes there’s no reason South Korea should be behind the North in space technology, that Japan and China have space programs, and Seoul needs to get with the program and present a new national vision and strategy for science and space development.

Marmot’s Note: I’m on record supporting South Korea’s development of not only long-range missiles, but also nice, shiny MIRV warheads to sit on top of those missiles, so sure, I’m down with rockets for “space exploration.” Whether space exploration should be a national priority is another matter. There was a time the Soviets were ahead of the United States in space technology, and look where that got them.

For what it’s worth, Park Geun-hye said during the last debate that the Korean flag would be flying on the moon by 2020. Moon Jae-in thought this was a good idea, too. Korea currently plans to put a landing vehicle on the moon by 2025. When will they put Sam Rockwell on the moon? That’s anyone’s guess.

The Verge is negative on Samsung and Lee Kun-hee’s business practices

Now Sam Byford over at The Verge writes an interesting English language article on the controversial rise of Samsung and their history of legal issues.

Sam acknowledges that Samsung grew rapidly and made smart business decisions:

During the late 80s and early 90s it seemed all but inevitable that Japan would become the dominant manufacturing power in the world. Of course, today the country struggles against South Korean rivals, battered by a hostile exchange rate and sky-high labor costs, but it was Lee’s foresight around two decades ago that allowed Samsung to get the jump on the likes of Sony. He saw Japanese firms dragging their feet on digital technology, creating an opportunity for Korean companies to muscle in on their turf with better, more efficient business practices.

However, he holds no punches on the negatives of the chaebol family system and its relation with government:

While Lee Kun-hee once implored his workers to “change everything but your wife and kids,” that change may not go far enough for Samsung. The traditional chaebol model has helped the company become one of the most successful in the world, but its conservative values are unlikely to help it become a major force for innovation. Lee Kun-hee’s controversial time in charge has undeniably brought the company success — for Samsung to become a truly loved brand, however, it must start looking to a new generation of leadership that prioritizes design and originality over ruthless competition.

Although the article is linked here, it does not necessarily mean that its opinions are shared or endorsed by this blog.  Any ways, a very lively comments section- very Marmotesque.

 

Microsoft to suspend XBox Live service to minors from Nov 27

According to Bloter.net, Microsoft Korea sent out an email yesterday telling folk that from Nov 27, it would no longer provide XBox Live Service to those under 18 living in Korea.

That means no more online gaming or downloading content on the XBox.

On a positive note, it also means no longer getting pawned by Korean middle school kids in COD.

Microsoft Korea is saying this is because of Korea’s computer gaming law that bans those under 16 from playing online games past midnight. Microsoft Korea said it would be too difficult to implemented a system that would suspend service to minors at specific times of the day, or block minors at the request of their parents in a worldwide service.

Local game services are following the law, but global services like XBox Live are not. Anyway, terminating service for minors was the best option to keep XBox Live alive in Korea, Microsoft Korea explained.

Even non-minor users of XBox Live in Korea will need to undergo I-Pin verification through XBox’s homepage.

Blotter notes the irony of the gaming law, namely, that it does not apply to offline gaming.

In June, Sony “temporarily” suspended service of its PS Store in Korea because of the gaming law. It has yet to be reopened.

Marmot’s Note: Government regulators in the Most Wired Nation on Earth score another own goal. Still, it’s an own goal I stand to benefit from, so good job, I say.

On a related note, making my way slowly through Black Ops II’s campaign. Like what I see so far. And I sort of missed Manuel Noriega.

The Diplomat: Korea needs to innovate

Robert Kelly of the Asian Security Blog has penned a piece in The Diplomat called “A Battle for the ‘Seoul’ of South Korea.

I’m not wild about the title, or actually sure what it means, but Kelly hits on several familiar notes regarding intellectual property rights and what he feels is a need for an injection of  innovation — something he says requires a profound shift at Korea’s very core.

Moving Korea toward more innovative production will require two major changes, perhaps so enormous they should be called cultural. First, Korean education needs to emphasize creativity and free-thinking more. Far too much pre-college training focuses on the rote recitation of answers with little underlying comprehension.

Drawing from his experience as an educator here, he says that the system…

…encourages an intense “copying culture” in which the instructor’s thoughts are treated like ideal answers to open-ended questions and parroted back.

And what would a piece on South Korean innovation be without a Samsung vs. Apple reference?

When the iPhone hit and Koreans learned of it, Korea’s telecom oligopolists panicked. They pressed the Korean government to maintain a protectionist security standard to prevent the iPhone’s arrival for two years, while Samsung effectively reverse-engineered the iPhone to create a competitor.

You can read the rest here.

So, what’s been going on between Samsung and Apple?

Back in late August Apple was awarded a $1.08 billion verdict in San Jose, CA court.  It looked bad for Samsung.  Since then, the Great Thermonuclear Patent War of the early 21st century between Samsung and Apple has gotten more nuanced with wins and loses for both parties.

Apple has lost in Japan, the Netherlands and the U.K. (including the appeal), with the U.K. loss being particularly irritating for Apple.  Furthermore, the fight appears to have moved beyond the court and into supplier relationships, supply chain management, unit sales and marketing.

It’s common knowledge in the industry that not only is Samsung a major competitor to Apple in finished goods, but a major supplier of components such as logic chips, flash memory and screens.  Recent tear downs of Apple product show a noticeable reduction of Samsung made components, particularly flash memory.  However, Apple still buys a lot of screens and logic chips from Samsung.  It appears there are very few companies that can supply as many logic chips to Apple for the quantity and quality requirements that Apple needs.  Samsung, appears to know this and has apparently (and arbitrarily) raised logic chip prices by 20%.  According to sources, Apple has no choice but to eat this.  Some sources claim this is just Samsung’s way of “creatively” recouping their settlement losses to Apple.  At the same time it is currently not written in stone that the San Jose court verdict will even stand, as Samsung’s lawyers move to declare a mistrial.

Turmoil with major suppliers has made timely availability of Apple’s brand new iPhone 5 spotty.  There are reliable rumors that Apple forked over $2 billion to keep nearly bankrupt Sharp afloat as a somewhat reliable supplier for iPhone 5 screens.  Without reliable supplies of the iPhone 5, Samsung’s Galaxy S3 has taken the lead as the most popular smartphone in the world by unit sales.  Another hit?  Apple has been declared a copier by losing a Texas federal court decision that they infringed on virtual-private-network technology patents of VirnetX, in the tone of $368 million.

Supplier issues, patent losses, competitive pressures and no dynamite announcements of blockbuster products for the holiday season has weighed heavily and since August, Apple stock has gone from just over $700/share to $540, a loss of over 23%.  It’s been barely three months since the big San Jose verdict, however has the tide already begun to turned against Apple?

40 Months for stealing Korean broadcasts

According to Courier Herald (October 14, 2012) – Kim Sang-jin was sentenced to 40-months’ imprisonment for two counts of copyright infringement.

Kim operated websites which distributed pirated copies of movies, television shows, software and workout videos via internet download.

Some of the pirated materials were television shows illegally downloaded from Korean broadcasters.  The programs were marketed to the Korean community in the United States.  U.S. District Judge Richard A. Jones also ordered Kim to forfeit $409,776 to the government as proceeds of his crime.  Judge Jones said Kim was a “one man wrecking ball” against the industries whose work he stole.

“This defendant operated websites that engaged in copyright infringement on a massive scale,” said U.S. Attorney Jenny A. Durkan. “By stealing and selling the work of others, he damaged people working in many industries – software and video production companies, musicians and movie companies, even broadcast companies in Korea. All were denied income by his theft.”

It appears that Korean authorities alerted the Immigration authorities and Homeland Security in the United States of Kim’s wrong doings.  Why the harsh sentencing?

In asking for a prison sentence at the high end of the guidelines range, prosecutors wrote: “Mr. Kim created a one stop shop for pirated content that included music and videos as well as: software, video games, fitness videos, recorded sporting events, television shows, and movies including pre-release movies still in theaters.  His ability to market to an immigrant community and offer stolen content from a foreign country magnified his ability to go unnoticed and generate substantial personal profits.”

According to this short piece in The News Tribune (October 15, 2012) he was also ordered to pay $410,000 to the government.

That’s a North Korean tablet? Looks like an Android tablet to me.

North Korea showed off its indigenous designed tablet PC at an international trade fair in Pyongyang yesterday.

This was no doubt to throw cold water on the release of the Galaxy Note II in South Korea. They’re sneaky that way, them North Koreans.

According to the JoongAng Ilbo, the KCNA had reported in July that the “Achim” (“Morning”) tablet was growing popular among North Korean students, and last month, it even broadcast footage from the tablet PC factory, which I can only hope has some cool commie name like “People’s Tablet PC Production Factory No. 1″ or something.

Anyway, in the link above, the JoongAng Ilbo ran a couple of photos from the fair (courtesy AP), including one of a tablet design guy showing off his goods.

Say what you will about AP’s Pyongyang operations, but you’ve got to give ‘em credit for improving greatly the quality of photography coming out of North Korea.

Gee, I guess Koreans really DO back Samsung

At the WSJ’s Korea Real Time, Evan Ramstad cites poll data that suggests Korea really is “Samsung country.

Watercooler talk, newspaper editorials and Internet postings convinced us last week that South Koreans considered the verdict more than another turn in the long dispute between Apple and Samsung – it’s a slap in South Korea’s face by the United States.

On Monday, a Joong Ang Ilbo columnist wrote that the verdict was “no surprise” and is “the ‘American style’ of doing things when their interests are threatened. It is the yardstick Americans have stuck to in every economic and business battle. Anything that Americans are not tops at is evil and dangerous.”

Whew. We’ll put that down as an extreme expression of the public sentiment. A survey released Monday by Gallup Korea at last anchored the mood with some hard data. The results are sure to please Samsung executives, as they show the vast majority of the 606 South Koreans who were polled have accepted the company’s spin on the outcome.

I have to say, I was a bit surprised the results were as lopsided as they were. Sure, Samsung might be seen by some as a national champion, but there are many who also see it as the epitome of corporate evil—and not without reason. Surely, I thought, there’d be plenty of left-minded Koreans who’d hold their nose and root for the Americans just to see them stick it to Samsung.

Clearly I was wrong.

Of course, this may have nothing to do with nationalism—it could be just that many Koreans recognize the potential harm the verdict has done to consumer choice and IT innovation. Right?

Americans sore losers: JoongAng Ilbo editorial writer

The JoongAng Ilbo’s Sunny Yang lectures Americans about innovation:

To build a country and defend one is not the same work. It is not entirely wrong to claim Americans discovered, invented and created almost every modern cutting-edge technology. They were great builders, but not such good defenders. If they had not been self-indulgent with their pioneering works and endeavored to stay on top of the market with innovations, the latecomers would not have dared to jump into the fray and attempted to outperform them.

But somewhere down the road, American cars and semiconductors became mediocre and failed to appeal to consumers. Turning the blame on competitors for their underperformance has not helped American industry before and won’t now.

One newspaper article questioned if Apple, having lost its drive for innovation, can merely appeal to American patriotism to survive. Without deep self-retrospection and a dedication to innovate, the strategy of relying on past supremacy cannot save the American economy.

To be fair to Yang, if there’s a group of people exceptionally qualified to recognize economic jingoism, it’s Korean journalists.

Still, given the nature of the case, you’d think it wasn’t the American company that lacked the ability to innovate, unless one defines innovation as “shamelessly ripping off your competitors.”

And on the Samsung—Apple front…

- The Fair Trade Commission (FTC) is looking to see if multinational firms are violating Korean patent law… not that this has anything to do with the Apple verdict, of course:

The FTC also plans to look into aggressive and allegedly unfair patent lawsuits filed by some multinational firms as a way to hinder the advance of Korean businesses in their markets or to profiteer by requesting too high licensing fees.

“The reason (behind the investigation) is that multinational firms have reportedly enforced their patents in an unfair manner through discriminative royalties policies, tie-in sales and unfair conditions in licensing contracts,” the official said.

- Samsung is strengthening its partnerships with American telecom providers to develop new designs.

- DLBarch was kind enough to link to the actual jury verdict.

- The real loser in the Samsung—Apple case is you.

- Hey, the Galaxy Note II has been unleashed!

- Samsung has, in all likelihood, earned a fanboy for life by sending a very, very cool Galaxy S III to a guy in Canada (HT to Stafford). I just hope Apple didn’t patent dragons.

More Samsung—Apple crap

- Did Samsung bet wrong in copying Apple? Or did it bet right? In PandoDaily, Farhad Manjoo writes that in ripping off Apple, Samsung might have made the smart call:

It’s tempting, after such a sweeping verdict in Apple’s favor, to conclude that Samsung’s decision to mimic the iPhone was a terrible mistake. The firm will now be on the hook for at least $1 billion in damages, and the judge could triple that amount. Samsung will likely face sales injunctions on many of its products, and will be forced to quickly design around Apple’s patents in its current and upcoming devices, if not to pay a steep licensing fee. Other companies that took inspiration from Apple—including Motorola, HTC and, at the top of the chain, Google—will also be stung by this decision.

But if you study what’s happened in the mobile industry since 2007, a different moral emerges. It goes like this: Copying works.

Of the three paths open to tech companies in the wake of the iPhone—ignore Apple, out-innovate Apple, or copy Apple—Samsung’s decision has fared best. Yes, Samsung’s copying was amateurish and panicky, and now it will have to pay for its indiscretions. But the costs of patent infringement will fall far short of what Samsung gained by aping Apple. Over the last few years, thanks to its brilliant mimicry, Samsung became a global force in the smartphone business. This verdict will do little to roll back that success.

- If you were wondering what they were saying in Samsung Land, here you go. Happy campers they are not. Outside of Samsung, though, I’ve got to say, the reaction seems rather muted. For blog hits alone, I was sort of hoping for Gaza-like protests of angry Korean tech geeks smashing iPads and burning Steve Jobs in posthumous effigy. Alas, there haven’t been any. At least among the people around me, Samsung doesn’t engender the same warm, fuzzy feelings that Apple seems to beget in the United States—and not entirely without reason, some might argue.

- Apple wants an injunction against eight Samsung phones.

- Laugha while you can, Apple Boy. Samsung might launch what North Korean leader Kim Jong-un recently called an “all-out counter-offensive” on Apple when it releases the iPhone 5 in October:

We are talking about utility patents covering basic smartphone functions here. And there’re few things more basic than smartphone connecting and using high-speed mobile data network. With LTE development starting in 2004 from NTT Docomo proposal and ending in a standard in 2009, it is safe to say – Apple had very little to do with it.

In fact, according to Daum, Samsung, LG and Ericsson own 60% of LTE patents worldwide.
[...]
And we didn’t even mention such mobile heavy-weights at the time as Nokia, Motorola (Google), or RIM.

And you thought chipmaker cross-licenses Apple is getting from suppliers to iPhone 5 will protect it from counter suits?

Think again.

So, Uncle Marmot, what ARE the Korean papers saying about the Samsung shellacking?

Well, the Chosun Ilbo noted the ruling was pretty much the mirror opposite of the Seoul District Court ruling in Korea the day before. This, they note, was due to the jury system in the United States. It’s said, the Chosun relates, that the jury focused more on the design and function patents rather than the difficult technical issues. That they returned a verdict in just 22 hours demonstrates that this was a possibility. The Chosun also suggested that the jury might have been rooting for Apple, a leading American company, at a time when the US economy is struggling, and this might have influenced the decision.

Nevertheless, one thing worth noting, said the Chosun, is that the court broadly recognized trade dress, a concept universal in the United States but still unfamiliar in Korea.

The Chosun concluded by saying Samsung has taken a major hit with the decision. Worse than the financial damages is that the company has now been branded a “copy cat.” The verdict will also have an impact on the roughly 50 patent suits ongoing nationwide. Samsung needs to escape from these “copy cat” fights by quickly bolstering their design and software capabilities, says the Chosun. In the short term, the company needs to boost its internal design capacity by bringing in the world’s best experts, and in the long term, it must find a way to strengthen educational facilities by bringing in leading professors in the global design field in order to turn Korean university students into world-class design talent.

The Joong-Ang Ilbo, as one might expect given its history, was not entirely pleased with the decision. It notes that “experts” point out the decision lacked fairness and universiality because the jury—composed of people without expertise in IT or patents—rushed the decision without sufficient consideration, thus helping Apple. The JoongAng has not intention to belittle the character and independence of US legal procedures, it says, but at the same time, it could not exclude the possibility that non-experts caught up in a protectionist social atmosphere had handed down a biased decision (Marmot’s Note: The possibility that the Seoul court handed down a biased decision doesn’t seem to have entered anyone’s mind).

The JoongAng warns that if a protectionist jury handed down a decision unilaterally favorable to the American company, Apple, it could have a significant impact on the development of the global IT industry and economic cooperation between Korea and the United States. It expresses the opinion that sufficient consideration is needed so that in the judge’s ruling and the appeals to follow, legal decisions on a point of bilateral economic contention are not distorted by the social atmosphere (Marmot’s Note: For a prime example of how the non-jury systems are better able to handle social atmospheres, see the Lone Star case).

The problem, says the JoongAng, is that Apple will raise even more parent disputes of a similar nature. Apple and Samsung already have about 30 cases ongoing in nine nations, including Korea and the United States. Being glass-half-full sort of folk, the JoongAng note this is proof that in the Samsung has become a world-class company threatening Apple in the smartphone and tablet PC market (Marmot’s Note: Gee, you think? Samsung is the world’s biggest smart phone manufacturer, with a market share twice that of Apple’s). As Samsung distinguishes itself in the world market, competing companies will try harder to contain it.

Finally, the Joongang warns that the “fast follower” strategy of copying or following other companies or their products won’t work anymore. Regardless of the verdicts, Samsung needs to become a “first mover” that creates new technologies and opens new markets. Of course, the “first mover” can profit big, but they need to endure a lot risk. They also need creative capabilities and will for continuous innovation. The JoongAng expresses hope that this verdict will become an opportunity for Korean companies to make the leap to becoming global leading companies.

Much of the same from the Dong-A Ilbo, except they were even more critical of the jury and worried that the decision could hurt consumer choice.

For the Hankyoreh, cases like this are interesting—they’re not especially big fans of the United States in Haniland, but they’re not too keen on Samsung, either. Their editorial on the decision was pretty balanced and workmanlike. Like the Chosun, it noted that American courts broadly acknowledge intellectual property rights over trade dress. It also notes, both in the editorial and in a related news story, that Samsung—as the leading manufacturer of Android phones—is something of a proxy target for Apple’s real enemy, Google. It’s easier to target the phone manufacturers rather than invading the proverbial Fulda Gap of Google, which offers the Android OS for free at any rate.

The Hani also noted that Samsung products have developed quite a bit in terms of technical innovation, and thanks to the lawsuits, they’ve begun putting together the know-how to develop new designs and differentiate themselves. Like pretty much everyone else, they called on Samsung to move from being a fast follower focused on hardware to becoming a market leader in design and software innovation. Unlike the other papers, however, they note to do this, Samsung needs a create a flexible and creative corporate culture, not one focused on keeping things in perfect order.

MARMOT’S NOTE: As a user of the Galaxy Note, iPad and iMac—all three of which I love—my own feeling is that regardless of the case specifics, it’s a shame both sides can’t lose.

Older posts Newer posts

© 2014 The Marmot's Hole

Theme by Anders NorenUp ↑