I can't believe this. Every article that tells him how to get around it, or just ignore it a scored high, while those who suggest that dealing with a nation the murders it's own people, horribly mistreats women, is rated low.
Because, as valid as those opinions may be, they're not germane to the subject.
The question wasn't "Am I wrong for working for a company that wants to sell software to Iran?"
Jay (=
Re:Those funny letters from The Matrix
on
May Ten Quickies
·
· Score: 1
I wonder how many people noticed that those were actually about half numbers/letters and half backwards katakana (Japanese phonetic characters usually used for foreign words, like italics in English).
I did.
I was wondering if those were Unicode streams or something...
Just as a side note, I made a deck out of black and white mostly-commons which pissed off ALOT of people by taking out their big fearsome deck they'd spent beaucoup dollars on. gave me much pleasure...
At my store, we used to do that. We'd take the piles and piles of common cards (with a few uncommons) left over when we broke a box or two open for singles, build decks with them, and sell them for like $5.
Sure, there are rare cards that are "simply better" than the other cards out there -- and the long-out-of-print cards like the Black Lotus were totally unbalaced when it came to practical gameplay -- but there are many tournament-level decks that rely on various common cards as staples...
Jay (= (I might have to start that up again -- the commons box is getting full...)
I never understood that about Magic (aka cardboard crack). Who the hell would play a game that was based pretty much entirely on spending cash?
It's not, partly for the reason you are about to state.
If I played cards [...] then I'd just make my own. Either copies of existing cards stats (unlikely to be a copyright violation then)
This is referred to as "proxying", and most people who come into my store to play do that -- they either proxy cards they don't have yet for a deck (to see if it works, and therefore is worth theeffort to acquire them), or they proxy "the big names" (the first-run, long-out-of-print cards).
Sure, you can't use proxy cards in tournaments, but the tournament rules are only mandatory if you're playing in a tournament (or plan to).
There's also this things that I've seen called trading, where people exchange cards for other cards of equal or greater importance. (I won't say "value", because the existance of card price lists throws that out of whack).
90% of the people who play this game around me acquire more of their better cards through trading. Yes, they have to buy cards to trade with, but that means they buy a few packs now and again, either to find the cards they're looking for or acquire cards as trade fodder. I wish people were plunking down money to buy piles of boxes of cards -- it means I could pay my bills on a regular basis...
What about all of the people out there that bash something cool out for Windows and the Mac OS?
I tell ya, about 80% of the software I use on my Mac would probably go out the door.
Of course, open-source advocates might say the shareware industry is irrelevant under the open-source scheme. But the fact is, shareware scratches a lot of itches for those closed-source OSes (the menubar clock that finally made it into the MacOS started life as a shareware project...).
Thanks for checking out our source code! I plan to use this space to post special messages to those who are helping to improve our web site -- by making our source code the best it can be. The fact that you are peeking behind the scenes at our site means you can make an important difference to this Internet effort. I'm grateful for your help and support in this campaign. Now let's keep working to build the 21st Century of our dreams!
Al Gore You're viewing the source code of algore2000.com, the official Gore 2000 Campaign Web Site. If you like to program HTML, JavaScript, Java, C, Cold Fusion, Active Server Pages, Perl, cgi, or any other language used for web publishing -- if you are casually browsing our code, and you are interested in becoming actively involved with the campaign as a volunteer -- then you've come to the right place!
In the spirit of the open-source movement, we have established the Gore 2000 Volunteer Source Code Project. The source code project will make this one of the most open and interactive political campaigns ever.
When we expand the site in the coming months, content from source code volunteers from around the nation will be posted according to its geographic origin. For instance, if you are from Iowa or New Hampshire or California and you want to volunteer by writing content (in the programming language or on the platform of your choice)for those parts of the site, we urge you to do so.
Geographic origin is one criteria by which volunteer submissions will be judged. If you have an idea or concept that transcends geographic location, let us know and we will do our best to incorporate it into the site.
All individual volunteer ideas and submissions will be considered, and successful submissions will be credited as they go on-line. This site is a living document, and we want it to get better every day. Your participation is crucial to its success.
To get involved with the Gore 2000 Volunteer Source Code Project, e-mail us at: sourcecodevolunteers@algore2000.com
Tell us who you are, and if posssible, (include the URLs for any work you have done to show us your talents, interests and abilities).
Thanks for checking out our source code -- and we are looking forward to hearing from you!
<!-------Attention Open Source Enthusiasts!--------------------
A special message for Open Source Software enthusiasts: We are very interested in developing content that takes advantage of Open Source software such as Linux. For starters, we are conducting a Gore 2000 Linux Screen Saver design competition among volunteers to see who can build the best Gore 2000 Linux screen savers. If you would like to submit a Gore 2000 Linux screen saver for consideration, or if you have ideas for this project, please send an e-mail to:
opensource@algore2000.com
Watch this space for more Open Source ideas and volunteer opportunities.
We are all quick to point the finger at something else...when we should take a look at the fact that we are all to blame.
Do me a favor and don't include me in your personal failings.
These kids were alienated because they were not accepted for who they were. We all judge people by their looks/music/etc...
It's possible that I might have actually gotten along with those in the "Trenchcoat Mafia" (there's a sound bite for the ages); I have similar tastes in music and video games, and probably suffered similar forms of alienation -- I was one of the "D&D geeks" in my high school.
Even those who try to be fair in not being prejudice fail. I take more notice to the more attractive girls and the others kind of fall by the wayside. I don't mean it...but I do.
It may be true that their peers (and, apparently, the faculty at the school -- what's wrong with THAT picture?) gave them a rough time, but don't assume that the rest of us would have done the same. I wouldn't be surprised to find out that many/.ers had similar experiences growing up...
I'm sure many writers just avoided the topic of Apple because they just couldn't deal. It would have been in Apple's interest to have shut the thing down a long time ago.
Yes, well, as an expatriate of EvangeList (well before its shutdown) I can say that most every post to the list that was about "unfair" coverage of Apple and the Mac was also followed by a plea from John Kalbig ("The Digital Guy") to NOT flame the writer out of existence.
But I suspect that the extreme nature of those who read EvangeList isn't much worse than some of the frothing-at-the-mouth commentary I read on Slashdot.
There was some good info on the 'List, too: I think I've still got the post about a person who tried to order a PC from many of the major OEMs without Windows pre-installed, with absolutely no success. (This was before the DOJ trial had started; the people on the 'List are just as anti-MS as Slashdot is, in many respects...)
I unsubscribed from EvangeList not because of the rabid nature of the Mac enthusiasts (it was a moderated forum, so most of what I got was well-written and articulate) but after a while the "special EvangeLista deals" (aka commercial email) drowned out what little good stuff there was.
But now, if I start crunching RC5-64 keys again, I can now switch my allegiance from Team EvangeList to Team Slashdot with a clear conscience. *grin*
Jay (= (Who bought a LinuxPPC CD and is going to start learning about Linux largely because of Slashdot)
hooray for protecting only popular opinions! you're a true american, buddy!
Do you mean to tell me that you actually think this is funny?
The last legal litmus test for obscenity that I read said the work in question has to have "no literary or artistic merit", and I believe the Dilbert Hole cartoons qualify in that regard.
I think the dialogue was optimized for its potential to offend -- straight gay-bashing profanity laced with dialogue taken from a bad direct-to-video porno.
If the "creators" of the Dilbert Hole want to create their own characters to spew that trash, that's their right. But the syndicators of Dilbert would be right to sic the legal attack dogs on them for using Scott Adams' property...
maybe i should be able to decide what i want to read, not you.
Then bump your threshold lower. Nothing is getting deleted -- it just gets points marked up or down. True, ACs can't set their threshold in the prefs and must do so manually, but that's one of the privileges of setting up an account.
As for people needing to register to get a user account, what's the big deal? If you're that worried about invasion of privacy, set up a decoy Hotmail (or Yahoo) mail account to register.
As far as I can tell, Rob is doing exactly what he said he's doing with the "real" email addresses (as opposed to the ones that you get to see under the poster's name); if you lose your password, that's the address he sends the password to.
I'll be posting a story that contains their names, addresses, home phone numbers, social security card numbers, sexual orientation, IQ, high school GPA and mother's maiden name next week.
Uh... Rob? I was joking when I put the thing about the hamsters in the "sexual orientation" part. Can you edit that for me?
Rob?
Jay (=
You misread the GPL -- I guess I did
on
OSI APSL Response
·
· Score: 1
Nope, read the next paragraph. It says you are still bound by the license in those cases.
The GPL allows you to stop distributing the code if you are bound by court order, etc., it does not say anywhere that you can compel third parties to destroy their copies or stop distributing them.
I re-read the section, and I agree. Thanks for setting me straight.
The difference, to this non-lawyer's eyes, is that the GPL terminates your right to distribute patent-covered code after you become bound by a court order or an agreement with a patent-holder.
Section 7 of the GPL uses the words "consequence of a court judgement or allegation of infringment [emphasis mine]". I'm not a lawyer either, but to me that says a court decision is not "required" for the copyright-holder of the code to decide to yank the code.
The only differences between the APSL and the GPL that I can see is that the APSL says that Apple still has the rights to do whatever they want with the code, whereas the GPL says that you can't do anything with the code (except probably using it yourself).
How is writing a book in one day going to effectively demonstrate "what world-wide collaboration and the open-source method" can do?
This project should not be used as an example of the strengths of the open-source development model, since this book will likely be a poorly-organized and largely useless piece of trash.
(Just like any OSS software written in 24 hours from scratch, I'd bet.)
Look how long it took Linux to get from the raw kernel Linus started to the OS that's stable and efficient enough to use today; look at how long it's taking for Mozilla to get something out the door.
The real strength of the open-source development model is that, if mistakes are made, there are a LOT more eyes to catch, correct, and distribute fixes for them.
Will you be posting the code for this new and improved SlashDot, or is it already up on the site.
Amen! I had just gotten around to downloading the slash 0.2 script to play with it, and I'd love to see the new and improved stuff.
You do good work, Rob. Slashdot is quickly becoming one of my favorite sites to read, and now it's also becoming one of my favorite sites to play around with.
Eric Raymond, president of The Open Source Initiative, said, "We see that Apple really gets it." He had reviewed the Apple Public Source License, producing some changes in the original draft, and said that it now is "strictly conformant" with open source principles.
If there's a problem with Apple's "almost-free" software license, Raymond don't seem to notice, and may have even contributed to the problem...
After hashing it out in the earlier Apple/Darwin thread, I'd prefer that Apple use the GPL -- as I said, I want Apple to do the right thing -- but if someone can prove infringement, and it can't be worked around, then no one can use the software, under the GPL.
And as far as I can tell, Apple can still do the same thing [terminate the license and keep the modified code for its own use] under the GPL.
After reading the GPL a bit more, I found this is not the case:
7. [...] If you cannot distribute so as to satisfy simultaneously your obligations under this License and any other pertinent obligations, then as a consequence you may not distribute the Program at all.
So in my reading, if Darwin were to be distributed under the GPL and become the subject of a claim of infrignement, then the GPL would prevent them from doing anything with it at all. (No wonder lawyers shudder at the GPL...)
It would have been nice to get this answer the first time I asked the question, instead of slogging through "Apple is evil" posts. It could have saved us all some time...
Yeah.. but it's the principle of the thing.. Someone COULD conceivably sue Apple for all of Darwin, and Apple would then have the option of terminating it all!
And as far as I can tell, Apple can still do the same thing under the GPL.
Don't get me wrong; I'm an Apple fan (I've used their machines for as long as I can remember) but I'm also impressed with Open Source movement, and I want Apple to be doing the right thing with Darwin.
But I haven't gotten a response yet as why the GPL, which says...
7. If, as a consequence of a court judgment or allegation of patent infringement [emphasis mine]
...will prevent Apple from doing what everyone says it can do under the APSL?
What is the difference between a "claim of infringement" in the APSL and an "allegation of patent infringement" in the GPL?
Well, the GPL clause is only because of a *court decision* forcing you to stop distributing it.
Re-read that section of the GPL: "If, as a consequence of a court judgement or allegation of patent infringement or for any other reason [...]". Is there any reason why an "allegation of patent infringement" in the GPL is different than a "claim of infringement" in the APSL?
Apple retains the right to revoke the license if they are even threatened with a patent infringement [...]
For the "Affected Original Code" (which is, according to the APSL, the code that "becomes the subject of a claim of infringement"); the license still covers everything else. Someone would have to sue Apple over the entirety of Darwin for Apple to justify yanking the entirety; anything else, Apple (or its contributors) can rewrite the affected portion.
sic) Apple may, at its sole discretion and option: (sic) (c) terminate Your rights to use the Affected Original Code,
I edited the original, but if you read the paragraph, it can be simplified to this. The rest is not very concrete and open to broad interpretation.
But again, Apple's sole discretion applies only to the "Affected Original Code" -- that is, the part of the code that is the subject of the infrignement claim. Why couldn't I (or Apple) take the rest of the software, re-write the disputed code, and keep on working?
Well, the GPL clause is only because of a *court decision* forcing you to stop distributing it.
Re-read that section of the GPL: "If, as a consequence of a court judgement or allegation of patent infringement or for any other reason [...]". Is there any reason why an "allegation of patent infringement" in the GPL is different than a "claim of infringement" in the APSL?
Apple retains the right to revoke the license if they are even threatened with a patent infringement [...]
For the "Affected Original Code" (which is, according to the APSL, the code that "becomes the subject of a claim of infringement"); the license still covers everything else. Someone would have to sue Apple over the entirety of Darwin for Apple to justify yanking the entirety; anything else, Apple (or its contributors) can rewrite the affected portion.
Yes, it is terminated by YOUR violation of the license. The APSL is can be terminated through anyones actions. Bill Gates sues apple, woops there goes your license...
9.1 Infringement. If any of the Original Code becomes the subject of a claim of infringement ("Affected Original Code"), Apple may, at its sole discretion and option: (a) attempt to procure the rights necessary for You to continue using the Affected Original Code; (b) modify the Affected Original Code so that it is no longer infringing; or (c) terminate Your rights to use the Affected Original Code, effective immediately upon Apple's posting of a notice to such effect on the Apple web site that is used for implementation of this License.
7. If, as a consequence of a court judgment or allegation of patent infringement or for any other reason (not limited to patent issues), conditions are imposed on you (whether by court order, agreement or otherwise) that contradict the conditions of this License, they do not excuse you from the conditions of this License. If you cannot distribute so as to satisfy simultaneously your obligations under this License and any other pertinent obligations, then as a consequence you may not distribute the Program at all.
So I'm working on my GPL program, YAM (Yet Another Mailer) and I find out after a year or so that one of my major contributors has borrowed code from Outlook Express.
Microsoft sues me, whoops; there goes my GPL license -- assuming I can't get their permission to use the code, or work around the disputed code, which as far as I can tell is exactly what the Apple Public Source License allows!
Slashdot Mirror
I can't believe this. Every article that tells him how to get around it, or just ignore it a scored high, while those who suggest that dealing with a nation the murders it's own people, horribly mistreats women, is rated low.
Because, as valid as those opinions may be, they're not germane to the subject.
The question wasn't "Am I wrong for working for a company that wants to sell software to Iran?"
Jay (=
I wonder how many people noticed that those were actually about half numbers/letters and half backwards katakana (Japanese phonetic characters usually used for foreign words, like italics in English).
I did.
I was wondering if those were Unicode streams or something...
Jay (=
Just as a side note, I made a deck out of black and white mostly-commons which pissed off ALOT of people by taking out their big fearsome deck they'd spent beaucoup dollars on. gave me much pleasure...
At my store, we used to do that. We'd take the piles and piles of common cards (with a few uncommons) left over when we broke a box or two open for singles, build decks with them, and sell them for like $5.
Sure, there are rare cards that are "simply better" than the other cards out there -- and the long-out-of-print cards like the Black Lotus were totally unbalaced when it came to practical gameplay -- but there are many tournament-level decks that rely on various common cards as staples...
Jay (=
(I might have to start that up again -- the commons box is getting full...)
I never understood that about Magic (aka cardboard crack). Who the hell would play a game that was based pretty much entirely on spending cash?
It's not, partly for the reason you are about to state.
If I played cards [...] then I'd just make my own. Either copies of existing cards stats (unlikely to be a copyright violation then)
This is referred to as "proxying", and most people who come into my store to play do that -- they either proxy cards they don't have yet for a deck (to see if it works, and therefore is worth theeffort to acquire them), or they proxy "the big names" (the first-run, long-out-of-print cards).
Sure, you can't use proxy cards in tournaments, but the tournament rules are only mandatory if you're playing in a tournament (or plan to).
There's also this things that I've seen called trading, where people exchange cards for other cards of equal or greater importance. (I won't say "value", because the existance of card price lists throws that out of whack).
90% of the people who play this game around me acquire more of their better cards through trading. Yes, they have to buy cards to trade with, but that means they buy a few packs now and again, either to find the cards they're looking for or acquire cards as trade fodder. I wish people were plunking down money to buy piles of boxes of cards -- it means I could pay my bills on a regular basis...
Jay (=
What about all of the people out there that bash something cool out for Windows and the Mac OS?
I tell ya, about 80% of the software I use on my Mac would probably go out the door.
Of course, open-source advocates might say the shareware industry is irrelevant under the open-source scheme. But the fact is, shareware scratches a lot of itches for those closed-source OSes (the menubar clock that finally made it into the MacOS started life as a shareware project...).
Jay (=
... I own a comic book store and I get the comic book adaptation of TPM on Wednesday.
Yes, WEDNESDAY.
I have to avoid temptation IN MY OWN STORE until I get to see the movie -- and it won't be on May 19, sadly...
Jay (=
At the risk of infringing someone's copyright:
- ----------------
- -------------->
- -------------->
<!------------------------------------------
April 6, 1999
Thanks for checking out our source code! I plan to use this space to post special messages to
those who are helping to improve our web site -- by making our source code the best it can be. The fact that you are peeking behind the scenes at our site means you can make an important difference to this Internet effort. I'm grateful for your help and support in this campaign. Now let's keep working to build the 21st Century of our dreams!
Al Gore
You're viewing the source code of algore2000.com, the official Gore 2000 Campaign Web Site. If you like to program HTML, JavaScript, Java, C, Cold Fusion, Active Server Pages, Perl, cgi, or any other language used for web publishing -- if you are casually browsing our code, and you are interested in becoming actively involved with the campaign as a volunteer -- then you've come to the right place!
In the spirit of the open-source movement, we have established the Gore 2000 Volunteer Source Code Project. The source code project will make this one of the most open and interactive political campaigns ever.
When we expand the site in the coming months, content from source code volunteers from around the nation will be posted according to its geographic origin. For instance, if you are from Iowa or New Hampshire or California and you want to volunteer by writing content (in the programming language or on the platform of your choice)for those parts of the site, we urge you to do so.
Geographic origin is one criteria by which volunteer submissions will be judged. If you have an idea or concept that transcends geographic location, let us know and we will do our best to incorporate it into the site.
All individual volunteer ideas and submissions will be considered, and successful submissions will be credited as they go on-line. This site is a living document, and we want it to get better every day. Your participation is crucial to its success.
To get involved with the Gore 2000 Volunteer Source Code Project, e-mail us at:
sourcecodevolunteers@algore2000.com
Tell us who you are, and if posssible, (include the URLs for any work you have done to show us your talents, interests and abilities).
Thanks for checking out our source code -- and we are looking forward to hearing from you!
-----------------------------------------------
<!-------Attention Open Source Enthusiasts!--------------------
A special message for Open Source Software enthusiasts: We are very interested in developing content that takes advantage of Open Source software such as Linux. For starters, we are conducting a Gore 2000 Linux Screen Saver design competition among volunteers to see who can build the best Gore 2000 Linux screen savers. If you would like to submit a Gore 2000 Linux screen saver for consideration, or if you have ideas for this project, please send an e-mail to:
opensource@algore2000.com
Watch this space for more Open Source ideas and volunteer opportunities.
-----------------------------------------------
Jay (=
I thought I recognized that home page.
Jay (=
(yes, that TrentC)
We are all quick to point the finger at something else...when we should take a look at the fact that we are all to blame.
/.ers had similar experiences growing up...
Do me a favor and don't include me in your personal failings.
These kids were alienated because they were not accepted for who they were. We all judge people by their looks/music/etc...
It's possible that I might have actually gotten along with those in the "Trenchcoat Mafia" (there's a sound bite for the ages); I have similar tastes in music and video games, and probably suffered similar forms of alienation -- I was one of the "D&D geeks" in my high school.
Even those who try to be fair in not being prejudice fail. I take more notice to the more attractive girls and the others kind of fall by the wayside. I don't mean it...but I do.
It may be true that their peers (and, apparently, the faculty at the school -- what's wrong with THAT picture?) gave them a rough time, but don't assume that the rest of us would have done the same. I wouldn't be surprised to find out that many
Jay (=
I think the name has little do to with what kind of code it is (virus vs. Trojan) and more with the soundbite-ness of it.
Ebola virus = eBayla virus, etc.
I know I'm being pedantic, but a lot of people are griping about the inaccuracy...
Jay (=
I'm sure many writers just avoided the topic of Apple because they just couldn't deal. It would have been in Apple's interest to have shut the thing down a long time ago.
Yes, well, as an expatriate of EvangeList (well before its shutdown) I can say that most every post to the list that was about "unfair" coverage of Apple and the Mac was also followed by a plea from John Kalbig ("The Digital Guy") to NOT flame the writer out of existence.
But I suspect that the extreme nature of those who read EvangeList isn't much worse than some of the frothing-at-the-mouth commentary I read on Slashdot.
There was some good info on the 'List, too: I think I've still got the post about a person who tried to order a PC from many of the major OEMs without Windows pre-installed, with absolutely no success. (This was before the DOJ trial had started; the people on the 'List are just as anti-MS as Slashdot is, in many respects...)
I unsubscribed from EvangeList not because of the rabid nature of the Mac enthusiasts (it was a moderated forum, so most of what I got was well-written and articulate) but after a while the "special EvangeLista deals" (aka commercial email) drowned out what little good stuff there was.
But now, if I start crunching RC5-64 keys again, I can now switch my allegiance from Team EvangeList to Team Slashdot with a clear conscience. *grin*
Jay (=
(Who bought a LinuxPPC CD and is going to start learning about Linux largely because of Slashdot)
hooray for protecting only popular opinions! you're a true american, buddy!
Do you mean to tell me that you actually think this is funny?
The last legal litmus test for obscenity that I read said the work in question has to have "no literary or artistic merit", and I believe the Dilbert Hole cartoons qualify in that regard.
I think the dialogue was optimized for its potential to offend -- straight gay-bashing profanity laced with dialogue taken from a bad direct-to-video porno.
If the "creators" of the Dilbert Hole want to create their own characters to spew that trash, that's their right. But the syndicators of Dilbert would be right to sic the legal attack dogs on them for using Scott Adams' property...
Jay (=
maybe i should be able to decide what i want to read, not you.
Then bump your threshold lower. Nothing is getting deleted -- it just gets points marked up or down. True, ACs can't set their threshold in the prefs and must do so manually, but that's one of the privileges of setting up an account.
As for people needing to register to get a user account, what's the big deal? If you're that worried about invasion of privacy, set up a decoy Hotmail (or Yahoo) mail account to register.
As far as I can tell, Rob is doing exactly what he said he's doing with the "real" email addresses (as opposed to the ones that you get to see under the poster's name); if you lose your password, that's the address he sends the password to.
Jay (=
I'll be posting a story that contains their names, addresses, home phone numbers, social security card numbers, sexual orientation, IQ, high school GPA and mother's maiden name next week.
Uh... Rob? I was joking when I put the thing about the hamsters in the "sexual orientation" part. Can you edit that for me?
Rob?
Jay (=
Nope, read the next paragraph. It says you are still bound by the license in those cases.
The GPL allows you to stop distributing the code if you are bound by court order, etc., it does not say anywhere that you can compel third parties to destroy their copies or stop distributing them.
I re-read the section, and I agree. Thanks for setting me straight.
Jay (=
The difference, to this non-lawyer's eyes, is that the GPL terminates your right to distribute patent-covered code after you become bound by a court order or an agreement with a patent-holder.
Section 7 of the GPL uses the words "consequence of a court judgement or allegation of infringment [emphasis mine]". I'm not a lawyer either, but to me that says a court decision is not "required" for the copyright-holder of the code to decide to yank the code.
The only differences between the APSL and the GPL that I can see is that the APSL says that Apple still has the rights to do whatever they want with the code, whereas the GPL says that you can't do anything with the code (except probably using it yourself).
Jay (=
How is writing a book in one day going to effectively demonstrate "what world-wide collaboration and the open-source method" can do?
This project should not be used as an example of the strengths of the open-source development model, since this book will likely be a poorly-organized and largely useless piece of trash.
(Just like any OSS software written in 24 hours from scratch, I'd bet.)
Look how long it took Linux to get from the raw kernel Linus started to the OS that's stable and efficient enough to use today; look at how long it's taking for Mozilla to get something out the door.
The real strength of the open-source development model is that, if mistakes are made, there are a LOT more eyes to catch, correct, and distribute fixes for them.
Jay (=
Will you be posting the code for this new and improved SlashDot, or is it already up on the site.
Amen! I had just gotten around to downloading the slash 0.2 script to play with it, and I'd love to see the new and improved stuff.
You do good work, Rob. Slashdot is quickly becoming one of my favorite sites to read, and now it's also becoming one of my favorite sites to play around with.
Jay (=
From http://www.macintouch.com/mxs.html:
Eric Raymond, president of The Open Source Initiative, said, "We see that Apple really gets it." He had reviewed the Apple Public Source License, producing some changes in the original draft, and said that it now is "strictly conformant" with open source principles.
If there's a problem with Apple's "almost-free" software license, Raymond don't seem to notice, and may have even contributed to the problem...
After hashing it out in the earlier Apple/Darwin thread, I'd prefer that Apple use the GPL -- as I said, I want Apple to do the right thing -- but if someone can prove infringement, and it can't be worked around, then no one can use the software, under the GPL.
Who "wins" in that case?
Jay (=
I wrote:
And as far as I can tell, Apple can still do the same thing [terminate the license and keep the modified code for its own use] under the GPL.
After reading the GPL a bit more, I found this is not the case:
7. [...] If you cannot distribute so as to satisfy simultaneously your obligations under this License and any other pertinent obligations, then as a consequence you may not distribute the Program at all.
So in my reading, if Darwin were to be distributed under the GPL and become the subject of a claim of infrignement, then the GPL would prevent them from doing anything with it at all. (No wonder lawyers shudder at the GPL...)
It would have been nice to get this answer the first time I asked the question, instead of slogging through "Apple is evil" posts. It could have saved us all some time...
Jay (=
Yeah.. but it's the principle of the thing..
Someone COULD conceivably sue Apple for all of Darwin, and Apple would then have the option of terminating it all!
And as far as I can tell, Apple can still do the same thing under the GPL.
Don't get me wrong; I'm an Apple fan (I've used their machines for as long as I can remember) but I'm also impressed with Open Source movement, and I want Apple to be doing the right thing with Darwin.
But I haven't gotten a response yet as why the GPL, which says...
7. If, as a consequence of a court judgment or allegation of patent infringement [emphasis mine]
...will prevent Apple from doing what everyone says it can do under the APSL?
What is the difference between a "claim of infringement" in the APSL and an "allegation of patent infringement" in the GPL?
Jay (=
Well, the GPL clause is only because of a *court decision* forcing you to stop distributing it.
Re-read that section of the GPL: "If, as a consequence of a court judgement or allegation of patent infringement or for any other reason [...]". Is there any reason why an "allegation of patent infringement" in the GPL is different than a "claim of infringement" in the APSL?
Apple retains the right to revoke the license if they are even threatened with a patent infringement [...]
For the "Affected Original Code" (which is, according to the APSL, the code that "becomes the subject of a claim of infringement"); the license still covers everything else. Someone would have to sue Apple over the entirety of Darwin for Apple to justify yanking the entirety; anything else, Apple (or its contributors) can rewrite the affected portion.
Jay (=
sic) Apple may, at its sole discretion and option: (sic) (c) terminate Your rights to use the Affected Original Code,
I edited the original, but if you read the paragraph, it can be simplified to this. The rest is not very concrete and open to broad interpretation.
But again, Apple's sole discretion applies only to the "Affected Original Code" -- that is, the part of the code that is the subject of the infrignement claim. Why couldn't I (or Apple) take the rest of the software, re-write the disputed code, and keep on working?
Jay (=
Well, the GPL clause is only because of a *court decision* forcing you to stop distributing it.
Re-read that section of the GPL: "If, as a consequence of a court judgement or allegation of patent infringement or for any other reason [...]". Is there any reason why an "allegation of patent infringement" in the GPL is different than a "claim of infringement" in the APSL?
Apple retains the right to revoke the license if they are even threatened with a patent infringement [...]
For the "Affected Original Code" (which is, according to the APSL, the code that "becomes the subject of a claim of infringement"); the license still covers everything else. Someone would have to sue Apple over the entirety of Darwin for Apple to justify yanking the entirety; anything else, Apple (or its contributors) can rewrite the affected portion.
Jay (=
Yes, it is terminated by YOUR violation of the license. The APSL is can be terminated through anyones actions. Bill Gates sues apple, woops there goes your license...
Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer!
From http://www.publicsource.apple.com/apsl. html
9.1 Infringement. If any of the Original Code becomes the subject of a claim of infringement ("Affected Original Code"), Apple may, at its sole discretion and option: (a) attempt to procure the rights necessary for You to continue using the Affected Original Code; (b) modify the Affected Original Code so that it is no longer infringing; or (c) terminate Your rights to use the Affected Original Code, effective immediately upon Apple's posting of a notice to such effect on the Apple web site that is used for implementation of this License.
From http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/gpl.html:
7. If, as a consequence of a court judgment or allegation of patent infringement or for any other reason (not limited to patent issues), conditions are imposed on you (whether by court order, agreement or otherwise) that contradict the conditions of this License, they do not excuse you from the conditions of this License. If you cannot distribute so as to satisfy simultaneously your obligations under this License and any other pertinent obligations, then as a consequence you may not distribute the Program at all.
So I'm working on my GPL program, YAM (Yet Another Mailer) and I find out after a year or so that one of my major contributors has borrowed code from Outlook Express.
Microsoft sues me, whoops; there goes my GPL license -- assuming I can't get their permission to use the code, or work around the disputed code, which as far as I can tell is exactly what the Apple Public Source License allows!
Jay (=