So they can't do anything about it except the post they just made.
Sure you can. SCO don't accept the GPL and so they have they have no license to distribute SAMBA. So the copyright owners of SAMBA (the SAMBA team et.al.) can (should) demand SCO to not redistribute SAMBA...
SCO does not accept the GPL (they state in public, that the GPL is invalid). But in order to use/distribute SAMBA, they need to accept it (otherwise they are not allowed to use it).
So either they stop complaining about the GPL or they imediately remove SAMBA from their servers.
As long as SCO doesn't accept the GPL as a valid license, the SAMBA team and anybody contibutetd to the project (which holds the copyright on their code) can very well and should demand that SCO removes SAMBA from their products.
Hmm... isn't it a litte bit too expensive to put a Nikon D2H with WiFi connectivity into a fridge just to monitor it's state and content over the internet?
So all the people on this list should crypt their file systems before somebody searches their homes. As long as nobody can find the files in question at home nobody can say anything against those people. RIAA can claim everything they want to, but as long the people it canot be proofen, that the people realy _had_ (=still have) those files (logs are not enough) the RIAA claims, they remain inocent.
I update/patch my system daily, usually nothing serious is happening (and if, then there is nobody to blame but me because I use the developer version of my OS). So why can't M$ come up with a update/patch system which works as reliable as apt-get?
Ok, first of all: our world will never be comlete secure! That's a fact we just always try to forget but 9/11 reminded us about.
We can try our best to make it a better place and we should do our best to do so.
But this doesn't mean, that the state do/is allowed to do anything they want to do. There is a good reason to have privacy, to have a right for privacy and have this privacy protected, damit!
How naive do politicans, think tank members and who else think that we are, when they try to tell that "Our government only wants to protect us, and would never misuse technology". Every system on earth, might it be the society, the curch, the government or something else is human, so what do you expect?
This is just one point why privacy rights have to be left untouched.
Communication between P2P nodes should be crypted (so nobody could that easily sniff between them). Sure, this doesn't help if a node belongs to RIAA, but they shouldn't offer music anyways, and in case they offer something else under a wrong name (for example a fake file under the name "Joe_Coker-Unchain_my_heart.mp3") than it should not be illegal to download this file anyways.
Then.mp3 files should be stored crypted. Any P2P software should be able to crypt/decrypt on the fly. So files you share and files you downloaded are not verrifyable. Best you even store the filenames crypted. So that nobody can even guess, what is on your HD (and you do not use a crypted file system).
Then mp3 players should be able to decrypt those files on the fly (you only once enter your password in the beginning when you start your mp3 player).
Mp3 encoder should be able to crypt their output on the fly (you only once enter the password when you start the encoder).
Weekest point: if the password is week or someone from RIAA hacks your computer and sniffes your password.
The whole thing should be bloddy easy to use and install etc.
And just to add one: Most recordings are already so bad, that you just wish, that you have had never bought a good pair of loudspeakers, since they reveal all the mess they have done to the recording.
So why need we a new "better" format? Just to reproduce the painfull recording in a even more painfullway?
Slashdot Mirror
Is it that easy to /. a M$ .NET server?
...are those people shortsighted or what?
File against 127.0.0.1. You get em all! ;-)
If the people you are punching are the one responsible at VeriSign for the SiteFinder "service", I would call it service for sure.
Hu! Www.sco.com doesn't respont. Www.sco.de neither.
Soon: The first time a phone line was /.-ed....
Sure you can. SCO don't accept the GPL and so they have they have no license to distribute SAMBA. So the copyright owners of SAMBA (the SAMBA team et.al.) can (should) demand SCO to not redistribute SAMBA...
SCO does not accept the GPL (they state in public, that the GPL is invalid). But in order to use/distribute SAMBA, they need to accept it (otherwise they are not allowed to use it).
So either they stop complaining about the GPL or they imediately remove SAMBA from their servers.
As long as SCO doesn't accept the GPL as a valid license, the SAMBA team and anybody contibutetd to the project (which holds the copyright on their code) can very well and should demand that SCO removes SAMBA from their products.
They didn't change the license. FSF is just thinking about stoping supporting gcc on SCO machines. That's something different...
The subject says it all. Sorry for the short comment, but for what reason do they need to know.
- Martin
The partition mounted at /usr/local/private is crypted on my machine. Why do I need a special motherboard?
Hmm ... isn't it a litte bit too expensive to put a Nikon D2H with WiFi connectivity into a fridge just to monitor it's state and content over the internet?
So all the people on this list should crypt their file systems before somebody searches their homes. As long as nobody can find the files in question at home nobody can say anything against those people. RIAA can claim everything they want to, but as long the people it canot be proofen, that the people realy _had_ (=still have) those files (logs are not enough) the RIAA claims, they remain inocent.
How likely is it, that someone sues customers of M$ products the way SCO promisses/tries to sue companies using Linux.
The FUD spread by SCO and the addition in the M$ Licensing Terms will make a good point for companies to stick/return to M$ products.
Now I'm just wondering: wasn't there something about M$ putting money into SCO sometime ago?
Says it all, doesn't it?
And if SCO then by mistake squares this imaginary sum they face a $9 bill from IBM! Hehe!
I update/patch my system daily, usually nothing serious is happening (and if, then there is nobody to blame but me because I use the developer version of my OS). So why can't M$ come up with a update/patch system which works as reliable as apt-get?
Lukily France still has their own will. As every state should have.
Ok, first of all: our world will never be comlete secure! That's a fact we just always try to forget but 9/11 reminded us about.
We can try our best to make it a better place and we should do our best to do so.
But this doesn't mean, that the state do/is allowed to do anything they want to do. There is a good reason to have privacy, to have a right for privacy and have this privacy protected, damit!
How naive do politicans, think tank members and who else think that we are, when they try to tell that "Our government only wants to protect us, and would never misuse technology". Every system on earth, might it be the society, the curch, the government or something else is human, so what do you expect?
This is just one point why privacy rights have to be left untouched.
It's time for cryptography.
.mp3 files should be stored crypted. Any P2P software should be able to crypt/decrypt on the fly. So files you share and files you downloaded are not verrifyable. Best you even store the filenames crypted. So that nobody can even guess, what is on your HD (and you do not use a crypted file system).
Communication between P2P nodes should be crypted (so nobody could that easily sniff between them). Sure, this doesn't help if a node belongs to RIAA, but they shouldn't offer music anyways, and in case they offer something else under a wrong name (for example a fake file under the name "Joe_Coker-Unchain_my_heart.mp3") than it should not be illegal to download this file anyways.
Then
Then mp3 players should be able to decrypt those files on the fly (you only once enter your password in the beginning when you start your mp3 player).
Mp3 encoder should be able to crypt their output on the fly (you only once enter the password when you start the encoder).
Weekest point: if the password is week or someone from RIAA hacks your computer and sniffes your password.
The whole thing should be bloddy easy to use and install etc.
<RANT>
Darn, I hate those RIAA people!
</RANT>
I propose that there should be one common slashdot login at the NYTimes.
- Martin
...but if they leave their chalk lying around the street unatended, is it a crime to pick it up?
It's only running on Apache for WIN...
And just to add one: Most recordings are already so bad, that you just wish, that you have had never bought a good pair of loudspeakers, since they reveal all the mess they have done to the recording.
So why need we a new "better" format? Just to reproduce the painfull recording in a even more painfullway?