Why not tell the community the software in question, as well as the needed changes and see what comes back STILL under the GPL? Of course you'll have extra timne on your hands, but you're free and clear as far as the issues with the employer.
This does raise interesting questions. IANAL, but I have free access to the largest legal databases in the world. Think I'll do some poking around this week!
You hate a format because a viewer compatible with your OS of choice is unavailable?! That's a pretty narrow minded view of the world. The push is on for Apple to either release a Linux viewer and/or release the codec allowing a viewer to be developed. Free distribution has one goal and many methods. Release the codec and allow many implementations, develop for all platforms, focus on one or two and screw the rest. All have advantages and disadvantages, but this is not our decision as much as it is our responsibility to convince towards the option of our choice. I happen to love QT over Mpeg and I'm also a Linux supporter. Doesn't mean I stay up at night fretting over it. I don't bother with AVI's as my main machine is a PowerBook and my Linux, Irix, WinNT, and W2k boxes are secondary minimally powered systems for testing and learning. I don't for a second feel deprived of content by not bothering with formats such as AVI.
Yeah, this is a couple weeks old, but one of the reasons I read/. is the breadth of coverage in areas that I don't always have time to follow. The Apple site lists some heavy requirements but myself and others have run it on a variety of configurations. Any G3 (upgrade cards included) with 64Megs can run the software adequately. The package was designed simply to allow home video to be edited and spruced up for either transfer back to VHS or DVD, or in some cases, Internet transmission.
The purchase of nation's TLD isn't a new concept. furthermore, we'll likely see registration schemes involving other countries TLDs. The power that is overlooked here is the necessity of browsers to auto resolve to such TLDs. Will Microsoft just add.tv to it's autoresolve function? Not likely, unless either paid, ordered by court, or by competitive necessity. Typing "ABC" into IE or Netscape will always resolve to ABC.com. The TLD is a means of getting "foo" registered when "foo.com" is taken, but it means little in getting access to the average Web user who is used to typing in a name only!
Software is goberned by Coptright, hardware by Patent. Your nifty adding software would be copyrightable. Your nifty mechanical adding machine would qualify for a patent.
"Altruistically, they could just lower the offering price to something trivial, but businesswise, this would be a bad move. The company that bought it would be able to offer the service that they designed, for a fraction of the cost, and edge out their potential future market."
The company that tried to do this would fail as badly as a company trying to buy and sell off Commodore 64's! Tech moves fast and mistakes suffer from compressed scrutiny. Dropping them is best.
Where and when will we have a board speed to use this uniformly? I want this for loading high cache calculations, but I also want it to (gak) handle the dsp aspects in a handhald. Very cool, very hot!!
There is a very useful need to open frequencies for better utilization. The wireless portion of data traffic is poised to rush copper/fibre, regardless of dis/advantages. As a regulatory body, it makes sense for the FCC to make the move to reclaim unused resources and to plan for the switchover to digital video.
What I don't like is the idea of allowing airwave "squatting" that this points at. What regulation will be applied to owned space? I'd like to hear from anyone with more details than the article presents. I'd hate to see a situation similar to what happened to domain names.
This is no surprise. Electronics are one of the easiest storage mediums to observe and capture info (privacy issues are a different thing, but will be tied to this I'm sure). I don't feel that anyone can and should expect privacy and security of data using the internet, cellular phone tech, and even copper tech (POTS). There is always such a cry when the Government or major business exploits a flaw in technology, yet a successful "crack" or "hack" is revered. This isn't meant to be "flamebait", just a comment on hypocracy.
The US Patent office updates Tuesdays!?! Does anybody agree that the fact that a large tech company can file a suit that will be litigated in or moved to a small, dare I say, technologically naive court causes fear? There are many highly intelligent judges out there (I deal with them daily!). Still, this is a developing area in which old ideas do not match "fairness". It's unfortunate, but "open debate" doesn't exist for lawyers and the system and the moves by Amazon are troublesome. suckage!
Can we now Patent hyperlinks?! I really want to read this patent! It's really a problem that the elected government is, by nature, set to a speed of learning that is 1/10th of the Technology development arena! Now we also have to suffer the joined ranks of the sub-structure on which laws are made and argued! Sad, sad day!
:The difference with what you're saying is that you don't have the right to, say, enter the building in the first place. So without their permission, you're automatically :locked out. Now, they say, "you may enter if you don't bring a gun", and allow you to enter. BUT that is not necessarily legal, any more than a "you may enter if :you're white" sign. The thing is, in general, the courts have upheld restrictions to the second amendment as special cases. : :So what he says about accessing his code may well hold, BUT that's something the courts would have to decide on.
I see your point. I am not locked out of my local police station, yet I could carry a gun in and carry such a statement, would it be legally binding?. No. This is probably a stress on the legal system that will never make law. Happens alot.
My point is that he is making a poor arguement for his actions. The Engilish language is open to all English speakers. If I write an extra hundred pages of text, yet include the full text of, say, an Isaac Asimov novel. Am I entitled to copyright protection? No. Can I publish it? No. Not without breaking the law of copyright in the US.
From the statement on "quakelives": "You do have a right to the source code, under the GPL. This is law. However much like the Constitutional American "Right to Bear Arms". I have the right to deny you access for exercising this right. While you can bear a concealed handgun, you are not allowed to bring it on a public bus, or many places of business. The signs usually say something like 'No firearms beyond this point'. Which is basically making people to give up their Constitutional rights to bear arms. The rules here will be similar."
By this logic, I can strap a sign on stating that by allowing me to enter the building, you are negating your posted sign and thus I CAN bring my firearm in!?!
I guess by this logic, all I need to do is send an email to them stating that "By recieving this, you agree that I am not legally bound to any of the restrictions displayed by, and implied by, your website." prior to entering.
"Science is a wonderful thing if one does not have to make one's living by it."-Einstein
Slashdot Mirror
Why not tell the community the software in question, as well as the needed changes and see what comes back STILL under the GPL? Of course you'll have extra timne on your hands, but you're free and clear as far as the issues with the employer.
This does raise interesting questions. IANAL, but I have free access to the largest legal databases in the world. Think I'll do some poking around this week!
You hate a format because a viewer compatible with your OS of choice is unavailable?!
That's a pretty narrow minded view of the world. The push is on for Apple to either release a Linux viewer and/or release the codec allowing a viewer to be developed.
Free distribution has one goal and many methods. Release the codec and allow many implementations, develop for all platforms, focus on one or two and screw the rest. All have advantages and disadvantages, but this is not our decision as much as it is our responsibility to convince towards the option of our choice.
I happen to love QT over Mpeg and I'm also a Linux supporter. Doesn't mean I stay up at night fretting over it. I don't bother with AVI's as my main machine is a PowerBook and my Linux, Irix, WinNT, and W2k boxes are secondary minimally powered systems for testing and learning. I don't for a second feel deprived of content by not bothering with formats such as AVI.
Yeah, this is a couple weeks old, but one of the reasons I read /. is the breadth of coverage in areas that I don't always have time to follow.
The Apple site lists some heavy requirements but myself and others have run it on a variety of configurations. Any G3 (upgrade cards included) with 64Megs can run the software adequately.
The package was designed simply to allow home video to be edited and spruced up for either transfer back to VHS or DVD, or in some cases, Internet transmission.
The purchase of nation's TLD isn't a new concept. furthermore, we'll likely see registration schemes involving other countries TLDs. .tv to it's autoresolve function? Not likely, unless either paid, ordered by court, or by competitive necessity.
The power that is overlooked here is the necessity of browsers to auto resolve to such TLDs. Will Microsoft just add
Typing "ABC" into IE or Netscape will always resolve to ABC.com. The TLD is a means of getting "foo" registered when "foo.com" is taken, but it means little in getting access to the average Web user who is used to typing in a name only!
Software is goberned by Coptright, hardware by Patent. Your nifty adding software would be copyrightable. Your nifty mechanical adding machine would qualify for a patent.
"Altruistically, they could just lower the offering price to something trivial, but businesswise, this would be a bad move. The company that bought it would be able to offer the service that they designed, for a fraction of the cost, and edge out their potential future market."
The company that tried to do this would fail as badly as a company trying to buy and sell off Commodore 64's!
Tech moves fast and mistakes suffer from compressed scrutiny.
Dropping them is best.
Where and when will we have a board speed to use this uniformly? I want this for loading high cache calculations, but I also want it to (gak) handle the dsp aspects in a handhald. Very cool, very hot!!
There is a very useful need to open frequencies for better utilization. The wireless portion of data traffic is poised to rush copper/fibre, regardless of dis/advantages. As a regulatory body, it makes sense for the FCC to make the move to reclaim unused resources and to plan for the switchover to digital video.
What I don't like is the idea of allowing airwave "squatting" that this points at. What regulation will be applied to owned space? I'd like to hear from anyone with more details than the article presents. I'd hate to see a situation similar to what happened to domain names.
effer
This is no surprise. Electronics are one of the easiest storage mediums to observe and capture info (privacy issues are a different thing, but will be tied to this I'm sure). I don't feel that anyone can and should expect privacy and security of data using the internet, cellular phone tech, and even copper tech (POTS). There is always such a cry when the Government or major business exploits a flaw in technology, yet a successful "crack" or "hack" is revered. This isn't meant to be "flamebait", just a comment on hypocracy.
The US Patent office updates Tuesdays!?! Does anybody agree that the fact that a large tech company can file a suit that will be litigated in or moved to a small, dare I say, technologically naive court causes fear? There are many highly intelligent judges out there (I deal with them daily!). Still, this is a developing area in which old ideas do not match "fairness". It's unfortunate, but "open debate" doesn't exist for lawyers and the system and the moves by Amazon are troublesome. suckage!
I actually asked permission to link to a site 5 years ago and surprised the company and recieved a 'thanks' ! Man, how life has changed!!
Can we now Patent hyperlinks?! I really want to read this patent! It's really a problem that the elected government is, by nature, set to a speed of learning that is 1/10th of the Technology development arena! Now we also have to suffer the joined ranks of the sub-structure on which laws are made and argued! Sad, sad day!
Your statement:
:The difference with what you're saying is that you don't have the right to, say, enter the building in the first place. So without their permission, you're automatically
:locked out. Now, they say, "you may enter if you don't bring a gun", and allow you to enter. BUT that is not necessarily legal, any more than a "you may enter if
:you're white" sign. The thing is, in general, the courts have upheld restrictions to the second amendment as special cases.
:
:So what he says about accessing his code may well hold, BUT that's something the courts would have to decide on.
I see your point. I am not locked out of my local police station, yet I could carry a gun in and carry such a statement, would it be legally binding?. No. This is
probably a stress on the legal system that will never make law. Happens alot.
My point is that he is making a poor arguement for his actions. The Engilish language is open to all English speakers. If I write an extra hundred pages of text, yet
include the full text of, say, an Isaac Asimov novel. Am I entitled to copyright protection? No. Can I publish it? No. Not without breaking the law of copyright in the
US.
From the statement on "quakelives":
"You do have a right to the source code, under the GPL. This is law. However much like the Constitutional American "Right to Bear Arms". I have the right to deny you access for exercising this right. While you can bear a concealed handgun, you are not allowed to bring it on a public bus, or many places of business. The signs usually say something like 'No firearms beyond this point'. Which is basically making people to give up their Constitutional rights to bear arms. The rules here will be similar."
By this logic, I can strap a sign on stating that by allowing me to enter the building, you are negating your posted sign and thus I CAN bring my firearm in!?!
I guess by this logic, all I need to do is send an email to them stating that "By recieving this, you agree that I am not legally bound to any of the restrictions displayed by, and implied by, your website." prior to entering.
"Science is a wonderful thing if one does not have to make one's living by it."-Einstein