1. Write an e-mail to every MP you can think of who you might be concerned about this (say, the House).
2. Include in this e-mail something important - like a new product idea you just came up with.
3. Add that the MPs have no rights to copy this email due to the content, and that you will sue them for the money you may have lost due to this idea leaking.
4. Sue them on the grounds that the mailserver, upon seeing 306 addresses to deliver it to, created 305 copies (one for each mailbox), which was clearly in violation of your copyright.
Do you really believe that? They're not "paying back" Jack Shit. They don't have any money of their own - all they have left is Novell's money. Chapter 7. End of story. Well, I consider money in Novell money that goes towards open source. Novell wants to recover what it's lost as a result of this frivolous suit, and they should. Novell should get claim on SCO's assets, because they've wasted money. SCO is, in effect, paying back the money that they've lost due to this suit, both in terms of direct expenses and of the business loss due to bad publicity (IIRC, the legal term is 'damage to title', though I'm probably wrong).
And in the US of A, one must always consider the punitive damages, which could be a major windfall for FOSS development.
And of all the places the money could go, I'm actually happy it's Novell (staying away from the sticky topic of the patent agreement), because it means that Moonlight development will get a boost, and Moonlight is something that benefits just about everyone (except maybe Adobe).
I'm really glad.:) This means that SCO (and its investors) will actually have to atone for their ridiculous claims and the resources they have caused supporters of Unix and OSS to squander. Finally, they can pay back the world what they owe, rather than selling everything and making out with what they can.
It almost seems as if SCO is working for some anti-FOSS organization... I'm going to avoid any potential flaming by avoiding that topic... but they certainly seem like their first priority is not allowing Novell to acquire their assets, even when they will lose them anyway.
I wonder whether this guy will end up with a warantless wiretap of his very own?
1:10 odds for the end of the year! Odds going as high as 1:1000000 by tommorrow! Get your tickets now!
> Ironically, the FSF is engaging in RIAA-like tactics itself. It has just announced a new > license, called the AGPL, which attempts to impose requirements upon companies > which "play" GPLed applications over the Net. That's right: If you are an ASP, > the FSF wants to require you to give away your software to the public if you're > running GPLed code. This is not much different from the RIAA's demands. So, it > seems to me that the pot is calling the kettle black here.
No. The AGPL solves a flaw in the GPL that has existed for a long time. The intent of the GPL is that the users of a program always have access to the source code. If I may use phpBB (a GPL'd PHP forum) as an example, if I host a phpBB site, I am required to dsitribute a copy of the source code to everyone who is given a binary copy of the program. However, the users see the results of the binary's execution - not the binary - and thus are exempt from the requirement. This means that I can put all sorts of proprietary juice into my phpBB, and I have absolutely no commitment to my users to show the source - which is directly opposite what the GPL is meant for and intends.
Also, this does not apply to existing GPL code. Like the LGPL, it is an option to a developer. If I am making a library, I likely would not release it under GPL, but the LGPL. People can make the same choices about the GPL vs. the AGPL. If you want to make a program or library that a company can't include as a component of a web application without being under that license, you may do so. But I can't see most programs wanting it - it just gives and answer to the ones that need it.
The FSF also made the right decision by making it a separate license. They learned from the unpopularity of the GPLv3.
I've seen these adds pop up, and they start by informing me that they're scanning C:\system32 for data... that would mean more if such a file existed. A quick call to ps shows that wine is not running, so there is no file on my system possibly identifiable as 'C:'. While it's fictionally scanning,
Just to be sure, I grepped my entire hard drive for some keywords I noticed in these ads and it came up nothing. So I'm pretty sure that I haven't been infected.
But had I been on Windows...
Also, this blog entry shows that Silverlight has a better security model... don't know whether the implementation is airtight, but at least they want it to be.
I use email. I am 15. I am Canadian, which is eerily similar to American.
I hate social networking sites. I view email as a reliable, personal method of communication that has no equivalent. I cannot imagine having use something like Facebook for my stuff... I love things were almost all my work is on the keyboard - the mouse is the biggest waste of time ever conceived, because it's not a discreet, learnable piece of information...
I managed to get a glimpse of the new website before the/. effect took its toll and they shut it down. It looks nice. I like how they're integrating it online, but more importantly, they're fixing various broken things that they couldn't before. I also like the idea of integrating racial substitution levels directly into the racial/class entries (mixing races and classes from different supplements probably will still be difficult, or maybe the online content will mitigate that). Also, half-elves now have inspiring presence. Sounds like they aren't just a bridge between elves and humans anymore.
I'm worried about the 18 3.0/3.5 books I own though. Most of the fluff is probably still applicable, but I hope that the 700+ dollars doesn't just get thrown away.
Slashdot Mirror
Solution:
1. Write an e-mail to every MP you can think of who you might be concerned about this (say, the House).
2. Include in this e-mail something important - like a new product idea you just came up with.
3. Add that the MPs have no rights to copy this email due to the content, and that you will sue them for the money you may have lost due to this idea leaking.
4. Sue them on the grounds that the mailserver, upon seeing 306 addresses to deliver it to, created 305 copies (one for each mailbox), which was clearly in violation of your copyright.
5. Tell the media.
As much as I don't think the antitrust monitoring should be removed, and as much as I hate to say it: Apple is hard competition.
I'm really glad. :) This means that SCO (and its investors) will actually have to atone for their ridiculous claims and the resources they have caused supporters of Unix and OSS to squander. Finally, they can pay back the world what they owe, rather than selling everything and making out with what they can.
It almost seems as if SCO is working for some anti-FOSS organization... I'm going to avoid any potential flaming by avoiding that topic... but they certainly seem like their first priority is not allowing Novell to acquire their assets, even when they will lose them anyway.
I wonder whether this guy will end up with a warantless wiretap of his very own? 1:10 odds for the end of the year! Odds going as high as 1:1000000 by tommorrow! Get your tickets now!
> Ironically, the FSF is engaging in RIAA-like tactics itself. It has just announced a new
> license, called the AGPL, which attempts to impose requirements upon companies
> which "play" GPLed applications over the Net. That's right: If you are an ASP,
> the FSF wants to require you to give away your software to the public if you're
> running GPLed code. This is not much different from the RIAA's demands. So, it
> seems to me that the pot is calling the kettle black here.
No. The AGPL solves a flaw in the GPL that has existed for a long time. The intent of the GPL is that the users of a program always have access to the source code. If I may use phpBB (a GPL'd PHP forum) as an example, if I host a phpBB site, I am required to dsitribute a copy of the source code to everyone who is given a binary copy of the program. However, the users see the results of the binary's execution - not the binary - and thus are exempt from the requirement. This means that I can put all sorts of proprietary juice into my phpBB, and I have absolutely no commitment to my users to show the source - which is directly opposite what the GPL is meant for and intends.
Also, this does not apply to existing GPL code. Like the LGPL, it is an option to a developer. If I am making a library, I likely would not release it under GPL, but the LGPL. People can make the same choices about the GPL vs. the AGPL. If you want to make a program or library that a company can't include as a component of a web application without being under that license, you may do so. But I can't see most programs wanting it - it just gives and answer to the ones that need it.
The FSF also made the right decision by making it a separate license. They learned from the unpopularity of the GPLv3.
I've seen these adds pop up, and they start by informing me that they're scanning C:\system32 for data... that would mean more if such a file existed. A quick call to ps shows that wine is not running, so there is no file on my system possibly identifiable as 'C:'. While it's fictionally scanning,
Just to be sure, I grepped my entire hard drive for some keywords I noticed in these ads and it came up nothing. So I'm pretty sure that I haven't been infected.
But had I been on Windows...
Also, this blog entry shows that Silverlight has a better security model... don't know whether the implementation is airtight, but at least they want it to be.
I use email. I am 15. I am Canadian, which is eerily similar to American. I hate social networking sites. I view email as a reliable, personal method of communication that has no equivalent. I cannot imagine having use something like Facebook for my stuff... I love things were almost all my work is on the keyboard - the mouse is the biggest waste of time ever conceived, because it's not a discreet, learnable piece of information...
I'm in ur homepage reading ur source. _
I managed to get a glimpse of the new website before the /. effect took its toll and they shut it down. It looks nice. I like how they're integrating it online, but more importantly, they're fixing various broken things that they couldn't before. I also like the idea of integrating racial substitution levels directly into the racial/class entries (mixing races and classes from different supplements probably will still be difficult, or maybe the online content will mitigate that). Also, half-elves now have inspiring presence. Sounds like they aren't just a bridge between elves and humans anymore.
I'm worried about the 18 3.0/3.5 books I own though. Most of the fluff is probably still applicable, but I hope that the 700+ dollars doesn't just get thrown away.