Slashdot Mirror
Torvalds Says Linux IP Is Sound
An anonymous reader submits: "In an interview with CRN, Linus Torvalds says he's confident there won't be any IP problems discovered in Linux. In fact, Torvalds, says he was extra careful with issues like the IBM Read Copy Update code."
gathers GAY NIGGERS from all over America and abroad for one common goal - being GAY NIGGERS.
Are you GAY?
Are you a NIGGER?
Are you a GAY NIGGER?
If you answered "Yes" to any of the above questions, then GNAA (GAY NIGGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA) might be exactly what you've been looking for!
Join GNAA (GAY NIGGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA) today, and enjoy all the benefits of being a full-time GNAA member.
GNAA (GAY NIGGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA) is the fastest-growing GAY NIGGER community with THOUSANDS of members all over United States of America. You, too, can be a part of GNAA if you join today!
Why not? It's quick and easy - only 2 simple steps!
First, you have to obtain a copy of GAY NIGGERS FROM OUTER SPACE THE MOVIE and watch it.
Second, you need to join the official GNAA irc channel #GNAA on EFNet, and apply for membership.
Talk to one of the ops or any of the other members in the channel to sign up today!
If you are having trouble locating #GNAA, the official GAY NIGGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA irc channel, you might be on a wrong irc network. The correct network is EFNet, and you can connect to irc.secsup.org or irc.isprime.com as one of the EFNet servers.
If you have mod points and would like to support GNAA, please moderate this post up.
This post brought to you by a proud member of GNAA
________________________________________________
| ______________________________________._a,____ |
| _______a_._______a_______aj#0s_____aWY!400.___ |
| __ad#7!!*P____a.d#0a____#!-_#0i___.#!__W#0#___ |
| _j#'_.00#,___4#dP_"#,__j#,__0#Wi___*00P!_"#L,_ |
| _"#ga#9!01___"#01__40,_"4Lj#!_4#g_________"01_ |
| ________"#,___*@`__-N#____`___-!^_____________ |
| _________#1__________?________________________ |
| _________j1___________________________________ |
| ____a,___jk_GAY_NIGGER_ASSOCIATION_OF_AMERICA_ |
| ____!4yaa#l___________________________________ |
| ______-"!^____________________________________ |
` _______________________________________________'
What a relief. It would really suck to have to switch back to IPX after all these years.
sulli
RTFJ.
Mad crazy shoutouts to the various crews of #norwalk, and the burning PC.
I thought the TCP/IP stack has been pretty solid for awhile. After all, it should have been in pretty good shape when Linus stole it from BSD.
I am. At a major Fortune 500 company, and we have ordered IT to remove Linux from all corporate assets. It is clearly tainted, and we cannot afford to expose the company like that.
make the TCP/IP jokes stop, please!
The Linux intellectual property is really sound, and not code? Oh great, now the RIAA are gunna bust our nuts for distributing Linux for free!
mogorific carpentry experiments
On a serious note, it is good to know he was thinking of these issues for some time.
Then if it falls in the forest does anyone hear it?
"It takes considerable knowledge just to realize the extent of your own ignorance." - Thomas Sowell
A coworker to me today that /. is a gay community. If thats true, then it needs to be in a FAQ or something. I've been frequenting /. for about a month now and I had no idea.
I feel like a straight guy in a gay bar now.
nt
what does it sound like?
Anyway, even though this interview is really short, Linus has good points. The kernel submission system is very open, unlike propriatary systems, and if there is a problem, it can be traced.
linux when they pry it from my cold dead hands, no wait, i meant to post that on the nra site. good to see linus finally helping to clarify things
Linus seems to be getting more and more annoyed with each one of these interviews. Why don't all these various online news sites take a hint? ;) at least ask him about -something- other than SCO SCO SCO.
Give the poor man a break.
There are lives at stake here!
All I got to say is...
"..."
'Nuff said... back to some kernel hacking!
Welley Corporation - SLM Scammers
"I don't like customers (laughing)."
In nutshell, this comment shows perfectly why Linux will never succeed in the mass market. It is built by developers...for developers. The end users are irrelevant.
"On a serious note, it is good to know he was thinking of these issues for some time."
Isn't this a sea change from his "don't worry about IP"?
1) Create an account
2) Apply +6 modifier to Troll, Flamebait, etc
3) Apply -6 modifier to the rest
4) ???
5) PROFIT!!!
Because he's one baaaad computer hackin' mutha fucka.
About time this came back around. I've been playing this throught my head over and over again, every time this SCO thing comes up, and finally we see the way it really works out.
See, we know SCO is like Darth Vader, and Microsoft is like the Emperor, pulling his strings. Now, we always thought IBM was Luke, kind of, in that they're the ones having to fight off Vader, but I couldn't quite figure out who Linus was. At first, I figured he was Han Solo, with the helping and the fighting and all, and Alan Cox is obviously Chewbacca (just check the hair).
But now I think we see that Linus is really a mix of Obi-Wan and Yoda, because he's helping and guiding, but not really fighting himself. At least I thought he was Yoda, just except for the lying (I mean, wtf didn't Yoda ever tell Luke SCO was his father?) but now we see Obi-Wan taking a more active role, actually standing up to SCO! So we're at the "full circle" part, where Linus tells SCO that if he strikes him down (i.e., inspects the code) he'll become more powerful (i.e. open sourced and GPL protected) than he can possibly imagine.
See, now it all makes sense! Now we just need Luke (IBM) to blow up the "Death Star" (frivilous lawsuits) with a proton torpedo (the GPL) shot down an "exhaust tube" (an exhaust tube). I hope that cleared it all up for everybody.
Consensual sex is boring.
A mathematician is saying that a-b = (a+b)(a-b)? There must be at least one lawyer payed by a rich company that could win a case against it...
I know exactly what you're talking about. I love feeling straight guys when I'm at the gay bar.
Due to excessive bad posting from this IP or Subnet, slashdot is fucking gay. If that's you, consider this a chance to come to one of our many fine orgies. If it's someone else, pass on this invitation. If you think this is unfair, please email me so I can come over and butt-rape you.
to a troll. Just talk about completely unrelated stuff. If you were going to hang your karma-whoring comment off another one, at least you could have done it farther up the page.
I thought he didn't care? As in "I don't want to know what we're putting in, don't tell me"? And now he was "extra careful"? Or is this some other type of IP he's referring to?
I agree
1. SCO's lawsuit is about misappropriation of trade secrets
2. RCU is a patented technology
3. Patents are publicly viewable
4. Therefore, RCU cannot be a trade secret
I don't see any way SCO can have a claim unless the RCU code that IBM donated contained SysV code or code derived from SysV. I seriously doubt IBM would be stupid enough to do that.
Anyway, since trade secrets are no longer protected once they are publicly revealed, no one should have anything to worry about except possibly IBM.
Fuck you. You think my purpose in life is to "hack" the kernel for you? I've got better things to do, fucko.
Sincerely,
Linus Torvalds
Kernel Maintainer, Dancing Queen, and Professional Assmunch
but what about the TCP problems?
Linus says something like, "It is just a contract dispute." It is a contract dispute, true; but, what is the contract dispute about? IP?
-- everyones not everybody and neither is everybody like everyone.
When Linus says a contract dispute between IBM and SCO has no bearing on Linux, I think he's being a bit naive. If the code IBM submitted to Linux was a violation of that contract, in addition to damages IBM must pay, a court may place an injunction on shipping Linux, or force Linux users to pay damages as well, depending on the wording of the licensing agreements in the distros being used. Of course this may be pessimistic thinking, but it's not an impossible scenario. Also, if IBM is found in violation of their contract, thats ammunition to pursue further lawsuits against other Linux companies and end-users.
Vote for Pedro
If a programming project is open source, with an uncontrolled number of people working on its, whats to stop someone comming forward saying I changed module x with code/ideas I stoll form company y in an IP case.
I know things like GPL try to address IP with open source but have their been any big court cases concerning IP on open source Software to test thing out? (forgive me if I an not aware of some big case, that 99% of everyone always knows about)
The one thing SCO has mentioned has been the Read Copy Update code that IBM gave us, and that wasn't accepted for the longest time into the kernel exactly because we knew the patents were owned by IBM. [But] we said we couldn't take it until you [IBM] said very explicitly that you also license the patents.
Does this mean there is patented code in the Linux kernel? How does that not conflict with the GPL?
The worst case senario (which I think is EXTREMELY unlikely) is that the courts find SCO right on all points, this means linux will become a "dark" OS, you'll have to find obscure sites and download the latest kernel before it gets locked down.
More likely is that SCO gets chucked out on it's arse for having such lame evidence (last I heard it was 80 lines that were copied word 4 word) and linux comes out fine.
But my biggest worry is that whatever the outcome whenever a big campany is looking to migrate, the issue of the "stolen" code will come out.
Some conversation like this will happen.
IT guy: We should switch to linux it's cheaper, faster and more stable.
Manager: But what about the stolen code?
(conversation on how it wasn't stolen etc.)
The biggest problem is our reputation will be tainted and that's whats bugging me.
Give a man a fire, he is warm for a day.
Set a man on fire, he is warm for the rest of his life.
Following my work researching The Linux Gay Conspiracy, I am saddened to announced that I have discovered yet another orgy of perverted heterophobic values. My claim lies with the Slashdot mangement.
First, what kind of name is Slashdot? This is obviously a code word in the homosexual community for something perverted.
Slashdot is an anagram of LAD SHOTS, which refers to Slashdot's pedophile agenda and T ASS HOLD, which refers to some gay sexual posistion that Michael and CmdrTaco enjoy.
The 'editors' of Slashdot, as they call themselves, are homosexual swingers with cleverly disguised nicknames.
CmdrTaco (aka "Rob" Malda) is the "head" honcho of Slashdot. Cmdr obviously refers to his desire to dominate over his gay partners, and Taco is obviously a sly reference to his colon. Update: It is well known that Taco claims to be married to Kate Fent. No one really believes that 'she' is actually his wife. We have proof that this 'she' is actually a he. It turns out that Kathleen Fent is an anagram of KHAN FELT EN ET. So this Kate of his is really Khan who "felt in it". I will not describe what that means as I am sure you can imagine yourself.Update From AC: Kate Fent = FAT TEEN, K.
Michael Sims, who goes as 'michael' on Slashdot, is a well known thug and advancer of homosexual agenda. His name is an anagram of ASS CHIME MIL which obviously refers to his desire to flaunt his lower organ.Update: It turns out that Michael Sims is also an anagram of ASS LICE, HMM, I?. That is so sick that words cannot describe the horror.
Father Randy "Pudge" O'Day is Slashdot's Mac propagandist. Macintosh computers are well known as the Gay computer due to their homosexual colors and stylings. An email exchange between 'Pudge' and Apple HQ have been leaked by a former Apple employee who converted to heterosexuality. These two emails (here and here) have been repeatedly posted on Slashdot, but are quickly censored by Slashdot moderators who do not want the public to know about its agenda.Update form Subject Line Troll - it appears the O'Day is just a few letter changes away from I'm Gay and rhymes with O'Day. Is anyone surprised that Mr. Pudge is a fudge packing Mac hippie?
Simoniker, a recent addition to Slashdot has been uncovered as Mr. Goatse himself. Simoniker is a frequent poster to the Games section of Slashdot, obviously because he enjoies modded versions of Quake 3 and UT2K3 as a homosexual warrior who likes to 'overcome' his opponents with his exagerated sized love member. In addition, Simoniker is an anagram of KEN I RIM SO (Ken is probably his current boyfriend) and MEN I IRK SO (which refers to his frustratingly troubled gay relationships, probably due to his rather large asshole).Update from AC: I'M ON ERIK'S... "Eriks what? We can only imagine" -AC.
CowboyNeal. How could I forget him? CowboyNeal is Slashdot's Poll Editor. His rampant homosexuality is obvious. "Cowboy Kneel" is what his name actually means. His odd sexuality needs no further explanation.
Please reply with additional information, contributions, and corrections. I will include any additional information and credit you with it in my further releases of this report.
careful enough to STEAL SCO's code!!!
Ignore the "p2p is theft" trolls, they're just uninformed
Mozilla faces a bleak future. In fact there may be no future at all for Mozilla because Mozilla is dying. Things are looking very bad for Mozilla. As many of us are already aware, Mozilla continues to lose market share. Red ink flows like a river of blood. Camino is perhaps the most endangered. Let's look at the numbers.
Mozilla leader Asa states that there are 7000 users of Mozilla. How many users of Firebird are there? Let's see. The number of Mozilla versus Firebird entries in Bugzilla is roughly in ratio of 5 to 1. Therefore there are about 7000/5 = 1400 Firebird users. Camino entries in Bugzilla are about half of the volume of Firebird entries. Therefore there are about 700 users of Camino. A recent article put the Mozilla browser at about 80 percent of the Mozilla market. Therefore there are (7000+1400+700)*4 = 36400 Camino users. This is consistent with the number of Camino bugs.
Due to the troubles of Netscape, abysmal sales and so on, Netscape went out of business and was taken over by AOL who sell another troubled service.
All marketing surveys show that Mozilla has steadily declined in market share. Mozilla is very sick and its long term survival prospects are very dim. If Mozilla is to survive at all it will be among web hobbyists, dabblers, and dilettantes. Mozilla continues to decay. Nothing short of a miracle could save it at this point in time. For all practical purposes, Mozilla is dead.
...but the TCP seems to be out and I had chili last night.
Dude, you missed it. The mozilla thread is further down the page. This is the place for a Linux- or even a *nix-is-dying post.
"...or force Linux users to pay damages as well, depending on the wording of the licensing agreements in the distros being used."
Linux users are not party to the contract between IBM and SCO, so nothing in that contract can compell Linux users to do anything.
The most the courts can do to Linux is force them to remove code IF (and I just can't see how it could, but if) SCO does in fact own the rights to code submitted to Linux by IBM. Linux will live on no matter what and SCO can't touch users or developers.
Don't moderate flamebait as Troll. Know the difference or you will be Meta-moderated.
Who the hell is this Torvalds character? Why the hell should we care what he has to say about Linux?
I swear, what's with these SCO articles with every Tom, Dick, and Nigel's opinion? What next, will we have Edna Graustein, of Kansas City MO's opinion on the validity of SCO's claims?
Uh... I was joking you realize... there is no "forestfall" property in any Linux kernal. Nor should there be, the lack of tree-group-related noise is one of the big advantages Linux has over Windows.
Yes folks, I will be here all week. No need to throw those tomatoes, I'm not hungry.
Man am I on a roll. A roll with sesam--ouch! Alright, alright!
[SIG] It's like putting a moose in the blender -- a recipe for disaster!
I've been waiting for my UUCP configuration mojo to come back into fashion; looks like no luck yet.
but what gets me about SCO's claim is that they say that even the comments in the source are the same as in their IP.
//This is the start of the program
Well, that makes sense. If the code is designed to handle a common, or inevitable problem then the comments would be the same.
IE
main (){
Has anyone else thought of this?
LK
"Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
As far I understabd it, Linux is no more than a gag of unlicensed UNIX code, BSD ripoffs, everything found in commercial UNIces, a dose of academic imagination, the Redhat & Co line and an attitude.
Why did he wait so long to announce this?
Also, so what? OJ Simpson said "I didn't kill them", and any accused person would claim innocense (I know Linus wasn't directly accused, shut up.)
Go ahead, mod me down for not cheering on the great Torvalds.
no comment
Linus :
Curious mathematical idea, but lovely rhetoric.
Why is this on /. What were you expecting him to say?
Torvalds: Linux IP sux. Switch to OSX/Windows.
This is a disgusting and obvious piece that should have been ignored.
Just like this post.
I'm not sure if I like this term "Joe Sixpack." I would probably consider myself a person of this description, judging from most contexts in which it is used - except my name isn't Joe. Also, when I drink I hardly ever finish off a whole sixpack before I get depressed and go to sleep. Sheesh.
The snow doesn't give a soft white damn whom it touches. -- ee cummings
Shit, mod parent insightful. ;)
That is not ignorance of the law, that is ignorance of the fact.
Not knowing that something is illegal is not an excuse.
Not knowing you DID something in the first place is a totally different matter.
Linus is not ignorant of the law, he knows taking someone elses stuff and putting it in his kernel without permission is illegal. The point is that, if you have no reason to suspect you don't have the rights, that should be the end of it as far as you are concerned, until someone points out otherwise.
To do things the other way would be incredibly expensive, and endless... how do you prove code is totally within your rights? Full patent search and public annoncement on each function and update?
btw if you wana learn about torvolds read
Just for Fun: The Story of an Accidental Revolutionary
I don't see any way SCO can have a claim unless the RCU code that IBM donated contained SysV code or code derived from SysV. I seriously doubt IBM would be stupid enough to do that.
IBM's contract with AT&T allows IBM to create derivative works but it also requires that IBM treat these derivative works the same way that they treat the Unix base code.
In this way it's similar to the GPL. If IBM had released a Linux kernel with RCU features, people would be clamoring for the RCU code to be released under the GPL.
Similarly, SCO is claiming that RCU is a derived work of Sys V and demanding that the derived work be kept secret as the Sys V codebase was.
Ironically, a ruling which finds RCU to not be a derived work of Sys V helps IBM but weakens the GPL by narrowing what must be considered a derived work. A ruling which holds RCU to be a derived work of Sys V hurts IBM, but helps the GPL by setting an expansive definition of what constitutes a derived work.
But even if IBM loses to SCO, it probably has no implications for Linux unless they can get a ruling that SCO rightfully owns the copyright to RCU which seems incredibly unlikely.
I have discovered a truly marvelous sig, unfortunately the sig limit is too small to contain i
The only thing that shows up being even close between the Linux kernel and the versions of Unix with source available is what seems to be a derivative of malloc and mfree in ate_utils.c
ate_utils is/was part of the NUMA code for IA64. It has been removed from the latest development and prepatch kernels (it's obsolete, from what I've read.)
There are some less interesting similarities between the signal handling code, but that's hardly remarkable. How many ways can you write a switch statement?
The key thing to remember though is that SCO doesn't actually claim they wrote the code. They claim to own rights in code that IBM wrote. I would bet that it's safe to assume that a detailed inspection of AIX and Linux 2.4.21 will reveal similarities. The question is, does IBM have the right to relicense code they created?
Ok, so is all Linux networking now done as VoIP? Anyone?
I'm glad that Linus Torvalds, esq. cleared that whole issue up. What's that you say? Linus is not a lawyer? You mean his comments are really no more insightful as the rest of the armchair lawyers on /.? I gotta run. I have to cancel the lawsuit I planned after reading all those comments on /.
Wrong. You don't invent an algorithm - you discover it. Algorithm has been exisiting forever as a part of the math. So, if you patent it then you just participate in a very wrong patent system of USA. If you want to protect your investment to that research you've made then you should implement it and then protect the code. When you implement the code - you invent it. Sort of. If you close your invented sources than it's a trade secret. Make sure to obfuscate it as much as even you stop uderstanding it - otherwise it will be reverse engineered. If you ope your invented source then you can copyright them.
But whatever you do the only way to protect your research investments is to keep researching and developing. In software industry every algorithm has an idea. If you got an idea - you don't need any freeking algorithm since you can re-implement it in no time. Examples: gzip vs zip, png vs gif, pgp vs rsa etc and so on. So, the real artifact of your invention is a combination of the source code *AND* the environment you've created to compile it, debug, test, and package. Again, the only way to proect investments to such combination is to keep being faster than your competitors.
Less is more !
How many times does RMS have to tell you. IT'S GNU/linux.
Errr... no. He probably went through the code with a fine toothed comb (or a decent pattern matching app) and found nothing infringing because there never was anything infringing to begin with.
Ummm, probably not a pattern matching app...what other source code do you think he had access to? I'd wager none...
Of course he says the IP is sound... Do you really think even if he knew it wasn't sound, he would say "Well, I don't know for sure, it could be bad, Linux might be in big trouble".
Another un-news worthy post from Slashdot. Congradulations, you win again.
Troll me all you want! Bring it on..
Troll: -75
Quality News from Slashdot: -400
Modesty is one of life's greatest attributes
Please, please, please can we avoid using the acronym IP? It is not at all a valid concept - these are all completely disparate areas of law and should never be referred to in the same breath without clarification.
It is often used as a term that encompasses patents, trademarks and copyright - but if you ever hire an "IP lawyer"(sic) you will nearly invariably find that they only specialise in one or two of the above areas.
Q.
Insert Signature Here
How did this junk get around the lameness filter? or does lameness only apply to comments posted by Apple uses who are mostly Gay and not necessarily of African descent. Linus is just happy not gay anyway.
The problem with your analogy is, if you create a separate kernel module, or other portion of code, and you consequently release it as GPL, then you cannot revoke the GPL on that code. The releases that you put it in as GPL will forever be GPL. However, you later decide you no longer want it to be GPL, and you quit working on it, and make all further releases under some other license. Now, you are COMPLETELY WITHIN YOUR RIGHT to do this. You are the copyright holder, you wrote the code in question. You can take your code an adapt it and merge it into SomeProprietaryUnix's kernel, and release it under any license you wish. But the code you initially made GPL and had distributed as GPL, will always remain GPL. Someone else can then work on it.
I really hate it when people don't understand copyright at all and make statements like this. As an artist, if I create a work such as a painting, and I then sell it to SomeRichCollector, I am in no way forbidden from painting another and giving it to my grandmother, or teaching some college students exactly how to recreate it. I can do whatever the hell I want with my art. Since source code also falls under copyright, the same applies to GPL source code. You are releasing it under a copyright that gives certain permissions for others to copy it. You are NOT giving away your copyright. You are simply making a release that carries no restrictions, and you cannot retract your release, same as I cannot later force SomeRichCollector to give me back my painting. I released it to him in that instance.
But the point here is, you never give up your right to the code in question, it is your creation for the duration of the copywrite period, and you can license it however you wish and as many times as you wish, with the exceptions of fair use.
This whole case is based upon a contract between IBM and SCO, where SCO claims that IBM, under contract to AT&T, agreed that any code they created and released with the SysV code be kept locked up. This is a derived work, and is somewhat fair, since it would be a Bad Thing for IBM to release their code with the SysV code under any other license. What isn't clear here is what a derived work is. I have no question that the RCU code as released with AIX falls under that contract, and must remain a 'secret'. However, what isn't clear is whether the code by itself is a derived work. Personally I don't feel that it should be, it is a component, a 'part of a whole', that when released in conjunction with AIX is a derived work since it is adding to the SysV code to create AIX, however if said code is reworked without using any portions of SysV, which would likely have been required in order to interact with the SysV kernel, as in to work with the Linux kernel, now it is 'pure' code that IBM has written, it has nothing to do with the SysV code. That is one issue that the courts will have to decide.
I have made ever attempt to spell check this post. But it would be very nice if the slashcode were changed to GIVE ME A BIGGER BOX TO WRITE IN!!!
C Pungent
hypothetically, if I wrote a commercial kernel, would I be allowed to donate code to linux?
When I read that quote about customers. I said, Halleluja this guy rocks.
There are places and times where it's a good thing to reach out to people for whatever reason and try to cajole them into various actions. Marriage wouldn't go far without a good customer service attitude on the parts of both partners, but there are limits for christ's sake. Just like mantra "let the markets decide" customer focus becomes a slavish dogma and it so damned refreshing to hear someone who has billions of customers say fuck em'.
Amen brother. Tell it to the people!
Am I the only one who reads this as StFU every time I see it in print?
Xix.
"Everything is adjustable, provided you have the right tools"
--
One by one the penguins steal my sanity...
Monty Python's The Life of Brian
You can be the first to comment on this story !
Did anyone see the above? It says so right under the CRN article.
whatever
It will soon be 'SCO/Linux (c) SCO, all rights reserved.'
They claim to own rights in code that IBM wrote
Then IBM must have signed some insane license agreement when they licensed code for AIX.
Something along the lines of: We[IBM] don't own any of the code we write.
Sounds a bit far fetched if you ask me. Nobody would be stupid enough to sign a deal where every line of code you write (in fact for ever since you signed the deal, because how are your going to prove you didn't write the code while the license was still valid), wouldn't be your property and to do what it whatever you please
since Linux is the kernel the GNU software is run on
the history of the world
If it's not Consolidated Lint, it's just fuzz.
What Linus was saying about patents was that he will not actively go and search out patents to see if a development is infringing. This is considered the proper practice for engineers as it would eliminate any possible clean-room development defense if they looked at the patents, AND (to make matters worse) patents are so horribly written that you may not even recognize an infringing item.
As for the RCU, he was extra careful because it was a known fact that IBM had a patent related to the code in question. So, he was being careful to make IBM formally license the patent before including the code.
--- I wish I could hear the soundtrack to my life. That way I'd know when to duck.
While it's true that no consumer would have to return the TV, they might have trouble getting it fixed. The recording studio at WMBC has a 24-channel mixer by Behringer. Behringer totally ripped of the design from Mackie, was sued, and lost. So the last time I got it fixed, it was $12 parts and $375 labor, because it's impossible to get information about it. "Get another one" is not an option for a college station.
Now, this shouldn't be a problem with Linux in the long run, as whatever code is deemed to be infringing (if any) can be removed/replaced. Heck, if I had to, I could revert all our machines back to 2.2.x until it all blew over. Fortunately, software is a lot more flexible than hardware. I just hope that, in the event that SCO wins, there aren't any Linux appliances out there that can't be easily updated to the "new" kernel.
WMBC freeform/independent online radio.
As soon as this whole lawsuit stuff was coming around, many *BSD users were saying "Well, look what happened to BSD when some company tried to lay claim to its code", and "I wouldn't take this lawsuit stuff lightly", etc. The BSD guys claim that even tho BSD won the AT&T lawsuit, people still dropped it for Linux.
If this lawsuit stuff is true for BSD, then it should be true for Linux. Agreed.
However, if people don't switch to BSD in droves because of this lawsuit, doesn't that disprove the "Linux is popular only because of the BSD lawsuit" theories that so many BSD uses claim?
What I'm saying is that once this lawsuit stuff is over with and people are still using Linux, that the idea that Linux because popular mainly because of the BSD lawsuit is bullshit. Would you agree, or will there be another reason why this lawsuit stuff is different?
I thought it was 198.182.196.56!
The only reason we have the rights we have is that people just like us died to gain those rights. -- Cheerio Boy
and what do most programmers do every time they sign and employment agreement with a software company?
my old sig is obsolete, and I haven't come up with a stupid enough new one yet
There's an idea that I had that I just wanted to get out in public so that no one can patent it: to encode a polygonal mesh as the union of a) separately encoded connectivity w/o geometry; and b) an unordered cloud of points to provide geometry w/o connectivity. The two would then be married with prediction algorithms typical of connectivity compression, with small corrective factors along the way. My plan was to resolve vertex id's in the same order that the standard edgebreaker traversal discovers them. Any new vertex that didn't have a full parallelogram to do its completion with (which would, of course, include the very first triangle), would be encoded with an explicit id in the point cloud. All others would predict as before, and then the encoding would be something like "take the 5th closest vertex to your assumed location".
Mixes of Star Wars characters you cannot have people be. Exact analogies you must have.
I have a life. I really do. I've just chosen to ignore it.
Yes the Mormon church is all about knowledge.
That is why your temple ceremony's are such easily accessible information. That is why the Mormon church tried to sue the government so that the temple ceremonys wouldn't be in the Library Of Congress.
Mormon's can be dis-fellowshipped or excumenicated for talking about what goes on the in the temple.
Oh I'd agree with about Mormon's loving Linux, but for opposite reasons. Are you a convert or life member? You ever heard about how the Mormon's practiced communism in the early days of the church (Oh I'm sorry they called something like "the law of concecration") But it was the same thing, whatever you earned/produced you gave to the bishop and he split it up according to the needs of each family. If you didn't practice this law, you were execumenicated. (I know i'm spelling that wrong, but you get my poing.)
The "free agency" that the Mormon church talks about has nothing to do with Linux.
Mormons and freedom of information do not mix.
I have never seen a more repeated liar than Linus Torvalds is turning out to be!
...it hasn't actually affected [Linux] in any real sense...it hasn't affected it in any real sense...
...nobody cares...
His basic premise of this newest article is buus: "we are VERY careful about what we put in Linux", when everybody knows his true mantra is "I will NEVER check for code infringement on principle". But it only gets worse. Check out some of these whoppers, the guy can't answer a single question hardly without dumping unbelievable amounts of BS on us:
CRN: How has the SCO-IBM lawsuit affected Linux?
Torvalds:
CRN: Do you have an explicit IP protection or due diligence process for Linux development?
Torvalds: It is kind of strange because the open-source community is regarded as being fairly laissez faire...but the people who actually do the work take copyrights very seriously.
CRN: What is your advice for solution providers who may be concerned about the suit as they are building business solutions with Linux?
Torvalds: I don't care about contract disputes between SCO and IBM. I think IBM has the lawyers to take care of that. I also think whatever happens, happens. The good thing about it being a contract dispute is that is purely between IBM and SCO. It has nothing to do with Linux. It has nothing to do with any users...it has nothing to do with Linux at all.
CRN: Are you playing a role to try to resolve this thing?
Torvalds: Not really...maybe I will end up being a witness to one or the other side, most likely it will be IBM. But I am not involved in any way and I don't really want to be.
CRN: What kind of feedback are you seeing from solution providers?
Torvalds:
CRN: Are you being called in by vendors such as CA and systems integrators to help win over some of these big Linux deals?
Torvalds: No. I never go to customer meetings..I don't like customers.
CRN: Is that why you decided to go to Open Source Development Lab and not a commercial vendor?
Torvalds: To me, the most important thing has always been that people be able to trust me.
FORGET IT DUDE, WITH ANSWERS LIKE THAT I CAN"T BELIEVE A WORD YOU SAY!!!
And the sad part about that is, a majority of /. posters are completely unaware of how the world actually works.
Are YOU the fuck that removed the ability to have IDE cards on IRQs other than 14 and 15 in the last "Stable" kernel release? THANKS A LOT YOU 'TARD! Stable my fucking ass! :) :(