iPhone developer
in [UK Mac]
|
From: Chris Ridd on 6 Feb 2010 13:08 On 2010-02-06 18:07:09 +0000, Woody said: > Chris Ridd <chrisridd(a)mac.com> wrote: > >> So would our cert of incorporation be the one for the one we bought? > > Yes. So it wouldn't even have your name on it I guess. That does make it pretty pointless. I guess the Californian (or US?) laws Apple are abiding by don't particular cater for that sort of situation. > I might see if I can remember where it is and fax it off to them, or > failing that, just set up a personal developer account and just put it > through there. Good luck with all the certificate handling stuff :-) -- Chris
From: Steve Firth on 6 Feb 2010 13:17 Richard Tobin <richard(a)cogsci.ed.ac.uk> wrote: > In article <1jdhyxk.18iemcy12atn1sN%%steve%@malloc.co.uk>, > Steve Firth <%steve%@malloc.co.uk> wrote: > > >> > That may be so in the USA, but it's not true here. > > >> Yes, but Woody was dealing with a US company. > > >And lives in the UK. > > The question was why they required it. And the answer is because > they are in the US. How odd that the answer "because they are in the US" is not the one that was given.
From: Peter Ceresole on 6 Feb 2010 13:33 Chris Ridd <chrisridd(a)mac.com> wrote: > >> So would our cert of incorporation be the one for the one we bought? > > > > Yes. So it wouldn't even have your name on it I guess. > > That does make it pretty pointless. I guess the Californian (or US?) > laws Apple are abiding by don't particular cater for that sort of > situation. Might it not be that the fax would in CA law consitute a document that you had sent them, and in case of litigation between them and you about your eligibility for the discount, could be shown to constitute fraud on your part? I don't suggest for a second that it could come to that in your particular case, but it might easily be a reason for them, as a general rule, to require a faxed document. -- Peter
From: Woody on 6 Feb 2010 13:42 Peter Ceresole <peter(a)cara.demon.co.uk> wrote: > Chris Ridd <chrisridd(a)mac.com> wrote: > > > >> So would our cert of incorporation be the one for the one we bought? > > > > > > Yes. So it wouldn't even have your name on it I guess. > > > > That does make it pretty pointless. I guess the Californian (or US?) > > laws Apple are abiding by don't particular cater for that sort of > > situation. > > Might it not be that the fax would in CA law consitute a document that > you had sent them, and in case of litigation between them and you about > your eligibility for the discount, could be shown to constitute fraud on > your part? I don't suggest for a second that it could come to that in > your particular case, but it might easily be a reason for them, as a > general rule, to require a faxed document. What discount? I still have to pay for it as well. -- Woody www.alienrat.com
From: Peter Ceresole on 6 Feb 2010 13:51
Woody <usenet(a)alienrat.co.uk> wrote: > What discount? I still have to pay for it as well. Sorry- I thought we were still talking about discounts, but it was developer status... But the principle remains the same. -- Peter |