Slashdot Mirror

Maybe he's short on cash, he seems to be rolling Slashdot hating into his Wikipedia hate site. The injustice! Slashdot obviously deserves it's own unique hate site. Of course, www.slashdotsucks.com is already registered...

That bastard Sollog gets a slashdot article for creating Wikipediasucks.com, but I don't get one for creating slashdotsucks.com? I guess I gotta start making fun of Taco's daughter or something.

I had major issues with my company tmobile. So I looked up "tmobile sucks" in yahoo.
I found many websites like "tmobilesucks.com". Then, I looked up "verizon sucks," and found "*verizonsucks*."
Then, I looked up every carrier I could think of...They all have a *sucks website! :)

hell, everything sucks, I guess

And yet a license like the BSD one only means that the initial work will remain in the public domain.

Yeah, that's why I suggest using the QingPL.

This is one of the big flaws in terms of "software freedom" as advocated by GPL pundits. There is this nebulous claim out there that not publishing the source code involves taking away freedom.

Actually, I agree. That's why my license doesn't require others to publish source code.

However, I wasn't referring to not publishing source code, I was referring to copyrighting derivative works.

To use an example, lets look at Walt Whitman. Leaves of Grass is avaliable as part of the Gutenberg archive. Random House publishes a new annotated version. Have I been stripped of any freedoms because the annotations and commentary are not public domain.

Yes, you've been stripped of the ability to copy and distribute those annotated versions.

If I make a new creative work on my own and copy protect it, am I infringing on anyone's freedom.

Not unless you sue someone for copyright infringement.

I think it should be licensed under the QingPL. Like the GPL, it's a once free always free license, but there's no silly requirement forcing people to distribute source code.

Mine, the qingPL. (the qing is not gnu Public License).

If Slashdot sucksso much, why do you post here?

Seems like your site, and I do mean your site, (because you seem like the only one submitting articles) has many articles supporting this perverse thinking.
Siva Vaidhyanathan has posted a nonsense article unfairly bashing the DMCA...
Debunking DMCA myths
And of course: Copyright © 2002 Anthony DiPierro.

What does it feel like?

Yep, that's why I release my works under the QingPL. Anyone who wants to copy them and mirror them on an independent network is completely free to do so.

Assuming, of course, that you can even generate a watermark.

If you can't generate a watermark, it's kind of a moot point whether or not it's legal to.

But maybe the only legal watermarks will have to come from "approved" sources, and that the price to get one may be high.

I don't think that's what this law is saying, and at least one other person, but I think Robert Heverly explains that more eloquently than I.

Fight evil corporate control of your words. Use the QingPL and SlashdotSucks.

"Alterslash is illegal. And is violating copyright. And unfortunately, under the way US copyright law works they will probably get a cease and desist soon." - Hemos

Thats totally a copyright violation.... I wish people wouldn't steal." - CmdrTaco

Fight evil corporate control of your words. Use the QingPL and SlashdotSucks.

"Alterslash is illegal. And is violating copyright. And unfortunately, under the way US copyright law works they will probably get a cease and desist soon." - Hemos

Thats totally a copyright violation.... I wish people wouldn't steal." - CmdrTaco

Last thursday John Ashcroft gave the FBI permission to sign up for slashdot.

You have posted a link to a NYT article without saying (free registration blah, blah, blah).

Here is the article on The Advocate, as posted by SlashdotSucks.

I think it only fair that the existence of this site is disclosed while discussing this story.

So does that mean that this is legal?

Ok, now should slashdot go after www.slashdotsucks.net, or www.slashdotsucks.com?

Think about it.