This is exactly the crux of the issue. ASL section 3 and GPL section 7 are not the same, though Apache argues that they are. Perhaps as a software provider, they haven't considered how the patent clauses affects someone who merely uses the software internally, rather than redistributes it.
My read of the revised license [IANAL] is that it isn't compatible. Apache makes several bogus arguments, namely: 1) Our software doesn't have patents anyway; and 2) ASL(3) is comparable to GPL(7).
Argument (1) is bogus because other people can release software under the ASL. For example Bob & Mimi can release their (individually patented) package under the ASL, and you have a grant under the ASL to USE and redistribute.
Argument (2) is bogus because when you sue Bob for violating your software patent, you can no longer USE Mimi's portion of the software without violating her patent.
GPL Clause 7 only talks about REDISTRIBUTION. So if this had been GPL software, you would no longer distribute because you'd be distributing what you claim to be your patented technology, but you could still USE it.
The Rover did not crash in "just a few days". The Rover crashed after the number of files in its flash filesystem accumulated to the point where the file table couldn't fit in the available memory anymore.
This took 6 months of file accumulation to occur.
Of course copyrights are valid before registration, my point is that (IIRC) these copyrights were not registered by SCO until AFTER they filed the original lawsuit, and thus after the alleged infringement as well, so why should they get the extra damages?
So now they want to claim extra damages for an infringement of "registered" copyright when the registration was filed after the lawsuit? IANAL but this really seems like grasping at straws, otherwise this would always happen in a copyright dispute to get the extra damages.
Plus, doesn't this now potentially get them in trouble with Novell who claims that the copyrights are still theirs? Criminal plagiarism, anybody?
That was already obvious from the Two Towers movie. AN army of elves replaced the army of rangers that was supposed to arrive during the siege of Rohan.
I can only imagine that they decided that putting the information into the movies to explain who the Rangers are would just clutter things up. The movie audience already knows who the elves are, so just use them instead.
What they have is "Certified Microsoft Engineer"... this means that they know what Microsoft thinks they need to know about buying, configuring and using Windows servers. It doesn't mean that they know what Microsoft critics think they need to know about fixing and maintaining the damn things.
Exactly, the risks that are posed by unpatched machines, and the odds of a machine being unpatched, pratically require a consumer recall. This might be the first defective product recall ever demanded due to national security issues.
In order to ensure that the recalled software is removed from machines, the fixed version of the software should be called something else. That way "Windows XP" becomes software that shouldn't exist anywhere. Microsoft should be required to advertise the recall heavily, just as most corporations that release defective products are forced to do. Perhaps MS can release the next software as "Windows XP (Fixed)"
The problem with promiscuous mode on Token Ring is that, unlike in Ethernet, when a Token Ring adapter drops a packet due to a lack of receive buffers, the adapter generates a MAC error report frame. This allows a ring management station to identify a potential problem.
Unfortunately, IBM's design for this wasn't too bright. The error messages are sent to a multicast MAC address, and every station on the ring starts receiving your error reports. Novell file servers HATE receiving error report frames. I don't know why, but if you generate too many of them the Novell server would always croak.
As an ex-Token Ring networking box engineer, I can give you a few pointers.
The important thing to remember about Token Ring is that the adapter and driver tend to be fairly stateful. By this I mean that the adapter is either in the ring or out of it. 90% of all problems then proceed from being in Limbo.
We used to have all kinds of problems whenever a desktop was warm booted. The adapter never got a power reset, and never got a software command to exit the ring. If the desktop software then didn't rejoin the ring (i.e. reinitialized the card from software reset to being OPEN), then the adapter was in the ring, but the driver wasn't. Eventually the adapter/driver receive buffers fill up since nothing is emptying them, and the adapter spews RECEIVE CONGESTION errors. This will trash your Novell servers (does anyone still use these?). I imagine that your problem is similar to this. Errors in ring speed would cause BEACONS, not errors. Are you dual booting, or anything similar? Does your PC go to sleep or low power mode? Anything that might interfere with draining the receive buffers will eventually cause problems.
Re:What can be done about terrorism?
on
More On Tragedy
·
· Score: 1
SO what exactly do you suggest?
Isolationism? Doesn't work, every time the US tries that a World War has started.
Declaring war on every non-democratic country in the world? Do you think that will improve our standing?
International politics is about getting along with your neighbors. You don't have to like them, but unless you feel like moving out, or moving them out, you're stuck with them. Which doesn't mean that you have to get along with all of them either.
Perhaps you forget that we have been enemies with the UK, France (and Canada), Spain (and Mexico), Japan and Germany in the past. It is not wrong for us to work at cross purposes with governments.
In the US you rarely if ever get 3-phase to your house, you don't even get 2-phase. As the article states on http://www.howstuffworks.com/power5.htm , what you get is one phase of center-tapped 240V. Hot to ground is 120V, Hot to Hot is 240V
M-services requires WAP. What M-services seems to really be about is setting a minimum level of functionality and a common look-and-feel for all phones.
Microsoft would probably require that users have
a currently paid up license to qualify for the upgrade discounts on new products as well. Yet another incentive to upgrade on schedule and make Microsoft's revenue stream more even....
Actually, now that I think about it, this gives them an additional incentive to be late with new products. Not only would people be forced to renew their older license, but then they'd upgrade as well. Microsoft would have no incentive to release products faster than the subscription cycle time...
Especially think about being in Australia!
My understanding (which came from a presentation from Telstra) is that they have high costs due to the fact that so much (web) content is in the US and all their customers want it.
Amen!
I remember my old reliable Sun Type 4 keyboard
with fondness, why can't I find a PC board like
that? I don't need a numeric keypad 95% of the time so why not use it for both numeric and navigation and cut 2.5 " off the keyboard width?
Or put the navigation keys on the left...
Basically what you are saying (and I'm not denying) that companies have a bunch of legal thugs on staff, and that they run around making baseless legal threats against people.
This is just a legalistic form of roughing people up.
A gun can be used in self defense, or to assault.
So can the legal system. Unfortunately, we don't prosecute people for making legal threats, only physical threats.
Except the Internet is not the phone system, and
for that matter, today's phone system is no longer
the simple huge network it used to be.
The phone companies now are running into the same exact problem as the Internet has. It's called Number Portability and it's a major PITA.
It used to be that an area code pretty much told you which Carrier's network you had to talk to, and the exchange told you which SSP you had to talk to. Now a phone number means nothing and you need to look in a database (AKA routing table) to figure out how to make the connections. Every number is going to be like an 800 number once NP is fully deployed. [ Did you know that 800 number's weren't portable when first rolled out? The pool was statically partitioned to the carriers, which meant if you wanted 800-FLOWERS you had exactly ONE choice of phone company. ]
If you don't comply with a subpoena, you go to jail. Or, I guess the judge issuing the subpoena would slap down some hefty fines in the case of a corperation like Yahoo.
You can fight a subpoena, but you can't put the cat back in the bag. The user was not allowed to fight the subpoena because they were not informed.
Re:patent "problem" is part of something much bigg
on
Do Patents Still Work?
·
· Score: 1
Unfortunately the cause for copyright reform seems to have suffered a setback. Eldred v Reno which challenged the constitutionality of retroactively extending the limited time for copyright protection seems to have been lost. I don't know if it has been appealed. The core of the issue for all intellectual property protection remains: The creator is granted something "ownership" that they would not otherwise have, for a limited time, in exchange for this the public learns of the creation immediately and further the creator's newly granted rights expire and the creation returns to the public domain. Background: http://www.boston.com/globe/magazine/8-29/features tory1.shtml Discussion: http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/eldredvreno/legal.htm l Decision: http://techlawjournal.com/courts/eldritch/19991027 .htm
When this system is pitched to a school board, someone should ask if Pinkerton will stand behind their product and bear any legal fees if the school is later sued concerning any information provides the school. If Pinkerton says they won't, it's up to the school to decide what to do with the information, people should ask "Are you providing a value-add service or not? Don't you believe in your service?" It should be made extermely clear that Pinkerton doesn't provide any guarantees whatsoever about the quality of the information that their service provides. Without a quality product, and product guarantees, there should be little to no market for it.
How can you sign away rights to the university if you have already signed them away to the corporation that you work for part-time? They are no longer yours to sign away... And requiring this as a condition of admission would amount to tortious interference, wouldn't it?
...Maybe we should encrypt all the way into our brains! To watch a Sony movie you'd insert a microchip card into your phone, dial Sony, pay for the movie, they'd load the key into your microchip, then you'd plug that into the back of your head, and you could watch the movie! Note that this would be a *per viewer* licensing agreement, no more freeloading by those large families who pay the same amount for a movie as a single guy.
Copy protection schemes are inherently bogus. Why? Because copyright eventually expires, and material passes into the public domain, yet the copy protection is still there.
Slashdot Mirror
This is exactly the crux of the issue. ASL section 3 and GPL section 7 are not the same, though Apache argues that they are. Perhaps as a software provider, they haven't considered how the patent clauses affects someone who merely uses the software internally, rather than redistributes it.
My read of the revised license [IANAL] is that it isn't compatible. Apache makes several bogus arguments, namely: 1) Our software doesn't have patents anyway; and 2) ASL(3) is comparable to GPL(7).
Argument (1) is bogus because other people can release software under the ASL. For example Bob & Mimi can release their (individually patented) package under the ASL, and you have a grant under the ASL to USE and redistribute.
Argument (2) is bogus because when you sue Bob for violating your software patent, you can no longer USE Mimi's portion of the software without violating her patent.
GPL Clause 7 only talks about REDISTRIBUTION. So if this had been GPL software, you would no longer distribute because you'd be distributing what you claim to be your patented technology, but you could still USE it.
The Rover did not crash in "just a few days". The Rover crashed after the number of files in its flash filesystem accumulated to the point where the file table couldn't fit in the available memory anymore. This took 6 months of file accumulation to occur.
Of course copyrights are valid before registration, my point is that (IIRC) these copyrights were not registered by SCO until AFTER they filed the original lawsuit, and thus after the alleged infringement as well, so why should they get the extra damages?
So now they want to claim extra damages for an infringement of "registered" copyright when the registration was filed after the lawsuit? IANAL but this really seems like grasping at straws, otherwise this would always happen in a copyright dispute to get the extra damages.
Plus, doesn't this now potentially get them in trouble with Novell who claims that the copyrights are still theirs? Criminal plagiarism, anybody?
That was already obvious from the Two Towers movie. AN army of elves replaced the army of rangers that was supposed to arrive during the siege of Rohan.
I can only imagine that they decided that putting the information into the movies to explain who the Rangers are would just clutter things up. The movie audience already knows who the elves are, so just use them instead.
What they have is "Certified Microsoft Engineer"... this means that they know what Microsoft thinks they need to know about buying, configuring and using Windows servers. It doesn't mean that they know what Microsoft critics think they need to know about fixing and maintaining the damn things.
Exactly, the risks that are posed by unpatched machines, and the odds of a machine being unpatched, pratically require a consumer recall. This might be the first defective product recall ever demanded due to national security issues.
In order to ensure that the recalled software is removed from machines, the fixed version of the software should be called something else. That way "Windows XP" becomes software that shouldn't exist anywhere. Microsoft should be required to advertise the recall heavily, just as most corporations that release defective products are forced to do. Perhaps MS can release the next software as "Windows XP (Fixed)"
The problem with promiscuous mode on Token Ring is that, unlike in Ethernet, when a Token Ring adapter drops a packet due to a lack of receive buffers, the adapter generates a MAC error report frame. This allows a ring management station to identify a potential problem.
Unfortunately, IBM's design for this wasn't too bright. The error messages are sent to a multicast MAC address, and every station on the ring starts receiving your error reports. Novell file servers HATE receiving error report frames. I don't know why, but if you generate too many of them the Novell server would always croak.
The important thing to remember about Token Ring is that the adapter and driver tend to be fairly stateful. By this I mean that the adapter is either in the ring or out of it. 90% of all problems then proceed from being in Limbo.
We used to have all kinds of problems whenever a desktop was warm booted. The adapter never got a power reset, and never got a software command to exit the ring. If the desktop software then didn't rejoin the ring (i.e. reinitialized the card from software reset to being OPEN), then the adapter was in the ring, but the driver wasn't. Eventually the adapter/driver receive buffers fill up since nothing is emptying them, and the adapter spews RECEIVE CONGESTION errors. This will trash your Novell servers (does anyone still use these?). I imagine that your problem is similar to this. Errors in ring speed would cause BEACONS, not errors. Are you dual booting, or anything similar? Does your PC go to sleep or low power mode? Anything that might interfere with draining the receive buffers will eventually cause problems.
SO what exactly do you suggest?
Isolationism? Doesn't work, every time the US tries that a World War has started.
Declaring war on every non-democratic country in the world? Do you think that will improve our standing?
International politics is about getting along with your neighbors. You don't have to like them, but unless you feel like moving out, or moving them out, you're stuck with them. Which doesn't mean that you have to get along with all of them either.
Perhaps you forget that we have been enemies with the UK, France (and Canada), Spain (and Mexico), Japan and Germany in the past. It is not wrong for us to work at cross purposes with governments.
In the US you rarely if ever get 3-phase to your house, you don't even get 2-phase. As the article states on http://www.howstuffworks.com/power5.htm , what you get is one phase of center-tapped 240V. Hot to ground is 120V, Hot to Hot is 240V
I've figured out his problem. He thinks that physicians are scientists! Physicians are a lot more like mechanics.
M-services requires WAP. What M-services seems to really be about is setting a minimum level of functionality and a common look-and-feel for all phones.
Actually, now that I think about it, this gives them an additional incentive to be late with new products. Not only would people be forced to renew their older license, but then they'd upgrade as well. Microsoft would have no incentive to release products faster than the subscription cycle time...
Especially think about being in Australia! My understanding (which came from a presentation from Telstra) is that they have high costs due to the fact that so much (web) content is in the US and all their customers want it.
Amen! I remember my old reliable Sun Type 4 keyboard with fondness, why can't I find a PC board like that? I don't need a numeric keypad 95% of the time so why not use it for both numeric and navigation and cut 2.5 " off the keyboard width? Or put the navigation keys on the left...
Basically what you are saying (and I'm not denying) that companies have a bunch of legal thugs on staff, and that they run around making baseless legal threats against people.
This is just a legalistic form of roughing people up.
A gun can be used in self defense, or to assault. So can the legal system. Unfortunately, we don't prosecute people for making legal threats, only physical threats.
The phone companies now are running into the same exact problem as the Internet has. It's called Number Portability and it's a major PITA.
It used to be that an area code pretty much told you which Carrier's network you had to talk to, and the exchange told you which SSP you had to talk to. Now a phone number means nothing and you need to look in a database (AKA routing table) to figure out how to make the connections. Every number is going to be like an 800 number once NP is fully deployed. [ Did you know that 800 number's weren't portable when first rolled out? The pool was statically partitioned to the carriers, which meant if you wanted 800-FLOWERS you had exactly ONE choice of phone company. ]
You can fight a subpoena, but you can't put the cat back in the bag. The user was not allowed to fight the subpoena because they were not informed.
Unfortunately the cause for copyright reform seems to have suffered a setback. Eldred v Reno which challenged the constitutionality of retroactively extending the limited time for copyright protection seems to have been lost. I don't know if it has been appealed. The core of the issue for all intellectual property protection remains: The creator is granted something "ownership" that they would not otherwise have, for a limited time, in exchange for this the public learns of the creation immediately and further the creator's newly granted rights expire and the creation returns to the public domain. Background: http://www.boston.com/globe/magazine/8-29/features tory1.shtml Discussion: http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/eldredvreno/legal.htm l Decision: http://techlawjournal.com/courts/eldritch/19991027 .htm
When this system is pitched to a school board, someone should ask if Pinkerton will stand behind their product and bear any legal fees if the school is later sued concerning any information provides the school. If Pinkerton says they won't, it's up to the school to decide what to do with the information, people should ask "Are you providing a value-add service or not? Don't you believe in your service?" It should be made extermely clear that Pinkerton doesn't provide any guarantees whatsoever about the quality of the information that their service provides. Without a quality product, and product guarantees, there should be little to no market for it.
How can you sign away rights to the university if you have already signed them away to the corporation that you work for part-time? They are no longer yours to sign away... And requiring this as a condition of admission would amount to tortious interference, wouldn't it?
...Maybe we should encrypt all the way into our brains! To watch a Sony movie you'd insert a microchip card into your phone, dial Sony, pay for the movie, they'd load the key into your microchip, then you'd plug that into the back of your head, and you could watch the movie! Note that this would be a *per viewer* licensing agreement, no more freeloading by those large families who pay the same amount for a movie as a single guy.
Copy protection schemes are inherently bogus. Why? Because copyright eventually expires, and material passes into the public domain, yet the copy protection is still there.