The problem with "donkey votes" is that politicians waste time arguing about who gets the top slot -- which they wouldn't care about if not for said votes.
TFBlogPost says a lot of Canonical contributed apps were rejected by GNOME; i.e. a significant portion of that 16x gap is GNOME rejecting Canonical's stuff. Since IIRC GNOME is GNU software... maybe they don't like Canonical's attitude towards closed-source software or something?
All forms of server side scripting, SaaS, just about everything written in SQL, most shell scripts, little glue programs (i.e. things you might write in Perl), etc.
IIRC Universal v. Reimerdes (the DeCSS case) failed to consider First Amendment and Fair Use, instead focusing on the fact that DeCSS itself was not intended for fair use. If they went after e.g. libdvdcss, they would IMHO (IANAL) be forced to overturn the DMCA due to those issues.
It means they supposedly couldn't figure out the copyright status of the torrents in question. TPB hosts legal and illegal stuff, so it might plausibly be hard to tell. You still need preponderance of the evidence to go after someone for copyright infringement.
Well, how do you measure use, by number of files or quantity of data (number of MiBs or whatnot), or even number of torrents? Since most distros have torrents, measuring by data could make a huge difference (since distros are mostly 700 MB to fit on a CD, which is a lot huger than your average mp3).
There's a problem there: OS: What's to concentrate on? They've got like 90%+ of the market. Office:It's way to late, given that OOo doesn't require re-training and Office 2007 (or whichever) does.
IANAL. IIRC DeCSS lost because it wasn't fair use since the site had ads. But libdvdcss (from VideoLan, makers of VLC; the equivalent of DeCSS; site has no ads in sight, no pun intended) might get cleared.
Do I have the option to ignore the license (especially the non-distribution and non-reverse engineering clauses) of a closed source application just because I want to use them?
WTF are you talking about??? You appear to be drawing a fine distinction where none is needed. If you violate the terms of the GPL, the license ceases to exist and you can be sued for copyright infringement.
Slashdot Mirror
The problem with "donkey votes" is that politicians waste time arguing about who gets the top slot -- which they wouldn't care about if not for said votes.
TFBlogPost says a lot of Canonical contributed apps were rejected by GNOME; i.e. a significant portion of that 16x gap is GNOME rejecting Canonical's stuff. Since IIRC GNOME is GNU software... maybe they don't like Canonical's attitude towards closed-source software or something?
I think he's ignoring kernel modules and such.
You seem to have misunderestimated the power of human stupidity.
Oh god, don't start that argument now, it's 1AM local time and I don't have the energy.
All forms of server side scripting, SaaS, just about everything written in SQL, most shell scripts, little glue programs (i.e. things you might write in Perl), etc.
FB is never going to become federated with anything else, because it would be their death knell.
At least you don't have flies in your eyes...
Not if you're using D2, which doesn't show the "submit" button until you hit preview.
IIRC Universal v. Reimerdes (the DeCSS case) failed to consider First Amendment and Fair Use, instead focusing on the fact that DeCSS itself was not intended for fair use. If they went after e.g. libdvdcss, they would IMHO (IANAL) be forced to overturn the DMCA due to those issues.
And if OSS is so immune to bugs, how come Firefox has so many problems? How come they patch tons of security updates with each release?
Because the don't delay all the fixes until the next Patch Tuesday, instead releasing fixes when they exist.
It means they supposedly couldn't figure out the copyright status of the torrents in question. TPB hosts legal and illegal stuff, so it might plausibly be hard to tell. You still need preponderance of the evidence to go after someone for copyright infringement.
Well, how do you measure use, by number of files or quantity of data (number of MiBs or whatnot), or even number of torrents? Since most distros have torrents, measuring by data could make a huge difference (since distros are mostly 700 MB to fit on a CD, which is a lot huger than your average mp3).
That "pointless" pedantry may yet work in The Pirate Bay trial.
Zune is ancient; Ballmer inherited it, right?
s/way to/way too/
There's a problem there:
OS: What's to concentrate on? They've got like 90%+ of the market.
Office:It's way to late, given that OOo doesn't require re-training and Office 2007 (or whichever) does.
IANAL. IIRC DeCSS lost because it wasn't fair use since the site had ads. But libdvdcss (from VideoLan, makers of VLC; the equivalent of DeCSS; site has no ads in sight, no pun intended) might get cleared.
WTF does this mean?
FTFThem
Do I have the option to ignore the license (especially the non-distribution and non-reverse engineering clauses) of a closed source application just because I want to use them?
Yes, but you'll get sued. Hence it's retroactive.
If you want to build a closed source thing, RMS (and, implicitly, the author of the hypothetical codec) thinks it should be difficult for you.
WTF are you talking about??? You appear to be drawing a fine distinction where none is needed. If you violate the terms of the GPL, the license ceases to exist and you can be sued for copyright infringement.
I think Jesus is supposed to mean RMS, based solely on appearance.
70
But can someone explain to me how Apple can remotely get away with bullying a company out of a different name for a completely different product?
Apple has lots of money.
Someone give this [wo]man a cigar!