Eh, no - you are confusing different forms of IP (which again proves why "IP" as a container is misleading). Copyright only applies to the form, not the idea. Ideas are never covered by copyright. Trade secrets are, or at least can be. The code is only a derived work if they start with the old code and simply change bits and pieces here and there. Completely new code, written from scratch, can never be considered a derived work, regardless of if the ideas are independently reached or not.
What they should look out for are trade secrets, patents and those NCA clauses. Judging by the summary, copyright is not a concern.
In most Berne-signatory countries, the author's "moral rights" cover that, in perpetuity. They encompass the author's right to be acknowledged as the creator of the work as well as limits the use to, for instance, non-defamatory uses.
The limits you propose are otherwise very close to the Pirate Party line on copyrights.
Can you, assuming we are living in a modern democracy which purports to champion freedom of speech, tell me exactly what kind of material that should get someone in trouble for simply reading or watching it? Who would be trusted with deciding where to draw this line?
/ The Gestapo thought Anne Frank was a terrorist, producing illegal material.
Setup the computers to seed popular torrents. It'll take a lot of load off the school's regular Internet access while providing the students with a valuable service.
Re:Still alive?
on
LHC Success!
·
· Score: 2, Funny
You're moderated Funny, but this is actually a great idea when you're overthinking. I take it a small step further; when I'm thinking "best out of three" I know I've already made up my mind.
Damn, I remembered wrong, I didn't start working there until 1996. I did work with the TFS Gateway 2.1 in 1995, but we did not use the virus scanning feature as far as I can recall (just SMTP to MS Mail). TFA refers to the support database, it should contain information about which customers used which features. It was a custom design in Notes running on Novell.
But let's build a new infrastructure around an unproven technology that's dependent on a corporation's patents.
The whole point of SwiftFuel is that it uses an existing infrastructure, as opposed to converting transportation to electrical-based. But I'm with you on the corp patent-based con, although I suspect that first off the patents are at least co-owned by Purdue, and second that the.gov would expropriate them in a nanosecond if they felt this was a good enough idea.
Anyway; this fuel, or something like it, will be needed to tide us over until battery or hydrogen storage technologies have caught up. Or we get under-the-hood cold fusion, whichever comes first.
Yes, "they" have been doing it, but that wasn't FRA. And yes, IB is a good example on what not to do. Sadly, todays MPs seem incapable of learning from past mistakes.
And in what instance did it serve us well in the past? He is probably referring to the incident in Ã...dalen 1931, when the heroic forces of truth managed to stop a full-scale terrorist attack on healthy Swedish family values.
Today FRA has the lawful right and ability to monitor all communication that is broadcast using radio/wave-transmission No, they do not have that lawful right. They do have the ability, though. And they do it. Illegaly.
For one, there is quite a stir in IT related, and mainstream media about this. Really? If so, you should have no problem pointing to at least one article in mainstream media in recent months.
The current government suggested this while in opposition a couple of years ago No, they did not. This comes from the MoD via the MoJ under Thomas BodstrÃm, but his lawyers screamed bloody murder so they canned it until it was revived by Odenberg under suspicious circumstances. Read more about it here: http://rickfalkvinge.se/2008/05/30/fra-forslaget-en-tidslinje/
Oh, they have been doing that since 1976 (as recently revealed by a recording of FRA's director acknowledging it). This is an attempt to legalize that practice, add a few useless "control stations" and give them even more authority.
Slashdot Mirror
Eh, no - you are confusing different forms of IP (which again proves why "IP" as a container is misleading). Copyright only applies to the form, not the idea. Ideas are never covered by copyright. Trade secrets are, or at least can be. The code is only a derived work if they start with the old code and simply change bits and pieces here and there. Completely new code, written from scratch, can never be considered a derived work, regardless of if the ideas are independently reached or not.
What they should look out for are trade secrets, patents and those NCA clauses. Judging by the summary, copyright is not a concern.
Oh God, I have that book. Does that make me a hardened nerd with no chance for parole?
Stop using Word.
So you would prefer they NOT use your book AND NOT buying it either?
That is the realistic alternative. Imagining all those copies being sales is not.
In most Berne-signatory countries, the author's "moral rights" cover that, in perpetuity. They encompass the author's right to be acknowledged as the creator of the work as well as limits the use to, for instance, non-defamatory uses.
The limits you propose are otherwise very close to the Pirate Party line on copyrights.
Can you, assuming we are living in a modern democracy which purports to champion freedom of speech, tell me exactly what kind of material that should get someone in trouble for simply reading or watching it? Who would be trusted with deciding where to draw this line?
/ The Gestapo thought Anne Frank was a terrorist, producing illegal material.
that was all we had as the upper classes would not let us play with the upper case characters
we used to dream of asterisks not to mention all punctuation those were not even invented back in the day
You have a lawn? Spoiled brat!
Setup the computers to seed popular torrents. It'll take a lot of load off the school's regular Internet access while providing the students with a valuable service.
So we have zombies posting on /. ?/quote>
You must be new here.
> And we're all still alive too!
I'm not, you insensitive clod!
Because copyright isn't 400 years. Yet.
Hear, hear! /me raises a glass to Ray's honor.
Ray, if you're ever in Sweden, drinks are on the house.
You're moderated Funny, but this is actually a great idea when you're overthinking. I take it a small step further; when I'm thinking "best out of three" I know I've already made up my mind.
Damn, I remembered wrong, I didn't start working there until 1996. I did work with the TFS Gateway 2.1 in 1995, but we did not use the virus scanning feature as far as I can recall (just SMTP to MS Mail). TFA refers to the support database, it should contain information about which customers used which features. It was a custom design in Notes running on Novell.
I worked for TenFour at the time, doing tech support and documentation. I'll see if I have any relevant stuff left in my archives.
The whole point of SwiftFuel is that it uses an existing infrastructure, as opposed to converting transportation to electrical-based. But I'm with you on the corp patent-based con, although I suspect that first off the patents are at least co-owned by Purdue, and second that the
Anyway; this fuel, or something like it, will be needed to tide us over until battery or hydrogen storage technologies have caught up. Or we get under-the-hood cold fusion, whichever comes first.
Yes, "they" have been doing it, but that wasn't FRA. And yes, IB is a good example on what not to do. Sadly, todays MPs seem incapable of learning from past mistakes.
Oh, they have been doing that since 1976 (as recently revealed by a recording of FRA's director acknowledging it). This is an attempt to legalize that practice, add a few useless "control stations" and give them even more authority.
Unless several MPs suddenly grow a spine, this one will pass in less than two weeks.
If she's going to Almedalen this year, she's more than welcome to look us up. We're even having a seminar on copyright's cost to society.