Slashdot Mirror
Novell Quotes AT&T on Derivative Works
grendelkhan writes "Novell has released their latest correspondance with the litigous bastards ordering them to stop the lawsuit by noon tomorrow, and clarify what the SVRX licensing agreements with AT&T meant regarding derivative works. The letter quotes AT&T from the April '85 issue of $echo as stating that they 'claim no ownership interest in any portion of such a modification or derivative work.' So much for the ladder rung analogy."
And reader highwaytohell links to today's CRN article in which Eben Moglen suggests that the SCO/Linux lawsuit cannot move ahead "until SCO resolves its dispute with Novell. And regardless of which company prevails in court, he said, customers won't have to pay any company for a license fee since both claimants--SCO and Novell--have distributed the Linux code under the GPL. Once again, SCO have no comment."
pist frost!
Can someone explain this in laymens terms? I'm so high right now I really don't understand what the post was about.
Mutex
For those that like to follow this stuff, I have found Google News to be an amazing service. I can only wonder what might come along and top these guys.
Life is the leading cause of death in America.
...you can hear the sound of a coffin being nailed shut!
Parent is offtopic, everyone knows Dean's campaign has been layed to rest.
Geminatron
What the fuck?
This isn't flamebait you stupid fucking shitp packing retarded mods. The google new page on the US mirror has this very headline.
Fuck heads.
Male circumcision is a far cry from female genital mutilation. While male circumsion is largely unnecessary now, excepting the rare case where the "hood is too small for the engine", in ancient cultures, where a bathtub or shower was not part of the regular household plumbing and bathing was not a daily excercise, there's a possibility that the flans could get more easily infected.
In other words, there *may* have been some health benefits to circumcision before daily bathing became common-place.
There isn't any such justification for female circumcision, which is far more painful, and can have brutal consequences.
You trivialize the issue. Male circumcision was originally promoted in the West as a deterrant to the "sin" of masturbastion. In such a Puritan society, it was an easy association to cleanliness. Muslims also promote female circumcision for much the same reasons. Neither case respects the humans rights of the victim. If saner minds prevailed, this were dangerous surgery would never be inflicted upon a newborn infant.