So how would France know that the source code matched the binary they were using? Maybe they'll audit each and every line of code, and compile it themselves. But somehow I doubt it.
It's pretty simple to tell if the binary matches the source. You compile the source and compare the binaries. If you are unable to produce the same binaries as you were given, then you don't have the source code.
It's three days later, but just in case you check your posts for replies...
GPL violation != MSEULA violation in ANY way ALL licenses derive their legal autority from copyright law. Violate the GPL? Violate copyright law. Violate the MS EULA? Violate copyright law.
Just couldn't get through a story without mentioning MS could you? Nope. Nor could I get through a discussion of the automobile industry without mentionaing Ford, GM, or Chrysler (now Daimler-Chrysler). It's really hard to discuss industry issues without mentioning industry leaders. Industry leaders also make good examples, as most people are familiar with them. Would you know what I was talking about if I mentioned 21COS's EULA? I doubt you've ever heard of the company, let alone read their EULA.
You want proprietary software, use the GPL. this is SO fuddy, on so many levels, I hardly know where to start...
Is the GPL proprietary? I don't think so, but let's assume for the sake of argument that it is. (IMHO, this is like assuming that the sky is teal and fuschia plaid, with orange polka dots, but I digress).
Only the software developer chooses the GPL. Software users choose software, and mostly don't care about the license.
If, as a user, you want proprietary software, why limit yourself to GPLed software? There are tens of thousands of restrictive licenses out there.
If, as a developer...ditto the rest of the previous paragraph.
Why is proprietary software bad? In my experience, you are locked into a single provider for support and upgrades. Without a cost-effective competitor, the vendor loses all incentive to perform well. It is impossible to fall into this situation with GPLed software. You can always shop around for better prices and service. Custom apps are kind of an exception to this argument, but that has nothing to do with the license.
It's funny that this rarely gets said. It's funny that you say that, because it comes up repeatedly in EVERY discussion of the GPL that I've ever seen on this site.
You want freedom, use the BSD license. Listen to yourself! You are saying "If you want to give people freedom, here is how you should restrict their actions"! WTF? If you want other people to be absolutely unrestricted in their use of your code, place it in the public domain. Any use of any license limits the actions of others.
In other words, "RMS is a nut, therefore the GPL is bad." I love the smell of an ad hominem argument in the morning.
Re:why go to the trouble of complaining to Malda..
on
Unisys Cracks The Whip
·
· Score: 2
Unisys will run the risk of their intellectual property falling into the public domain
This is so NOT true. You're thinking of trademarks, which must be vigorously defended or they can fall into the public domain (like yoyo, or aspirin). If you hold a copyright or a patent, you own it until it expires or you willingly give it up. You can not lose it through nonenforcement. If what you say were true, then Unisys could not now enforce their patent now after years of letting everyone think it was in the public domain.
As usual, IANAL, but I recently consulted with one over this very issue, and this is what he told me.
If your company is thinking about using MS source code? Well, think twice, because if you do anything that could be construed as a violation, even if it's clearly unintentional, it is going to be met with A HUGE LAWSUIT AND YOU WON'T GET A CHANCE TO ADDRESS IT AT ALL UNTIL YOU COUGH UP SERIOUS DOUGH!!!
How do you feel about OSS software More importantly, how do you feel about people who use an acronym and then expand part of the acronym? For example,
SAT (or ACT) test PC computer SIMM memory FSF foundation
Is this redundancy morally wrong, or merely non-optimal? And what do you think about the pedants who point these errors out? Jerks, or merely really really bored?
I don't think there's any rational way for a human being to answer your questions, but here's a place to start: www.transhumanist.org. I believe that creating true nanotechnology will be a singular event - no one can predict what will happen as a result of the event; predictions published before the event will seem silly to those who are around after the event has had its effect. Nanotech certainly has the potential for revolutionizing everything, but there's no way to predict the effects.
Don't forget to include slashdot in your citations page...
90% of the posts to this article will sound something like one of the following:
They sued for software patents...then THEY got sued for software patents! That's so ironic! I hope they lose, cause they suck, but I hope they win, because software patents are WRONG!
Intellectual property is different from other property. Software is different from hardware. The patent system needs to be fixed.
IANAL...IANAL...IANAL...IANAL...
Let's start recording our ideas somewhere so the big bad corps can't patent them.
I'm patenting air, so all you people breathing owe me money.
First petrified grits.
Sig11, you are such a karma whore for saying all those things that everyone agrees with.
The $400 MSN rebate "hack" was, IMO, not "ethical" because the deal was presented as quid pro quo
Did you read the terms of the offer? The offer said that you got a $400 rebate, IF you agreed to a long-term contract, UNLESS you lived in California. Taking the money and canceling the contract abided by the letter and spirit of the law and the offer.
someone cracks the NT sam file for a bank using l0phtcrack, the fbi is going to go after l0pht, since they wrote the software
I think the FBI would have cause to go after l0pht if they said things like "Our software can be used to crack NT security for banks, so if cracking the security for banks makes you nervous, then you probably shouldn't have anything to do with our project."
Selling a notched strip of spring steel is not illegal. Selling it as a tool to open your car when you lose your keys is not illegal. Selling it as a tool to break into someone else's car is illegal. It's a fine line between saying "This tool I'm selling can be used for illegal things" and saying "Buy this tool I'm selling so you can do illegal things." I think an ambitious federal prosecutor could severely blur the difference between the two.
I'm not saying that this is right; I'm merely saying that I think that Ian has walked into the kill zone of an ambush with a bullseye painted on his torso.
Er... charge him with what? Creating an information storage-retrieval system?
Er...yes. If I create an information retrieval system for the express purpose of disseminating child pornography, and then the system is used for disseminating child pornography, I think the Powers that Be might get a bit upset. You might think that silly, but I guarantee you that, given the sort of statement I quoted, law enforcement officials will NOT be amused. It will be apparent (to them) that this system was created for the express purpose of distributing illegal materials.
Call this flamebait, if you like, but I cannot BELIEVE the naivete of this guy. He has acknowledged, in the worst possible way, that this system can be used for Bad Things. Read this quote:
If you don't want to risk aiding the distribution of "kiddie porn" (which is *already* freely distributed on the Internet anyway), then steer clear of Freenet - it's not for you.
After this thing gets up and running, the FBI will doubtless be all over it. While they may not be able to identify the people who post child pornography, or the people who run the servers, they will certainly be able to identify the guy who helped architect the system. They will find quotes of his like the one above. They will charge him, try him, and convict him, and fry him.
taking away IRC from them for a day will provide the same effect of denying a cocaine user drugs for a day Here's a thought - find somebody who uses crack cocaine and tell them you are going to stand there and keep them from using it. Not something I'd want to try...
Are we now to assume that the source code to virii are the same plane as say, angry adolescent poetry? I wrote a couple pieces in high school describing violent acts. (Don't think I'd try it in today's climate). This is different from carrying out those acts. Displaying source code for a virus could be considered an act of speech, but spreading the virus itself (the binary, not the source) is likely criminal.
Or perhaps software cracks can now be viewed legally as civil disobedience for the digital era -- a charming rebuttal of the profiteering capitalist gluttons dominating the Age of Silicon? Civil disobedience is illegal and always has been; that's sort of the point. You break the law to demonstrate that the law is wrong, or unjust, or that the punishment does not fit the "crime." During the 1960's, blacks were arrested for sitting where they weren't supposed to, in violation of the law. As any D&D player any D&D player can attest, there's a difference between "lawful" and "good." As the nation saw the unlawful good blacks set upon by the lawful evil authorities, they realized the need for change.
So if you want to write software cracks, go write ahead. Distributing the binaries might get you arrested, fined, and jailed, but maybe that will prove your point. Keep in mind that there is tension between copyright law and free speech, as the Lawrence Lessig article linked to yesterday pointed out, so just because you have the freedom to write cracks doesn't mean that the creators of the cracked software won't sue you.
Any legal minds out there care to offer some perspective? I'm no lawyer (I hate that little acronym that suggests that I'm anal), but I think we need to distinguish between speech (source code) and action (binaries).
(FLAME) JEEZ! Did you even READ the original post? Let me quote the relevant portion for you; try to engage your brain before responding. I got news for you, in most non-server environments the proc is still the biggest bottle neck Hmm..."non-server". Let's say it again together..."non-server." Now, let's read the relevant part of YOUR post: The computer in question serves files... Tell me again how your response was relevant to the original post.
Pardon me while I mock this thread.
Post: "Women don't have testicles."
Response: "That's not true! I have testicles!" Me: "Idiot!"
Since your feeble mind isn't going to catch the analogy, I think I'll just sit back and enjoy my self-imposed feelings of superiority. (/FLAME) Now, where did I put those hot dogs?
Re:Everybody take a breather
on
Microsoft Loses
·
· Score: 2
the question is *who* should be remedying this situation A multi-national, multi-hundred-billion dollar company has too much power. Who but a government can resolve this with any degree of certainty?
A gradual erosion, courtesy of net appliances, the free software movement, or anything else, was the best hope for change And if MS resasserts dominance? If they prove resilient enough that they embrace and extend non-PC platforms or free software? Who could fix it then? If an entity is too powerful, it isn't enough to state that something, somewhere, sometime may weaken it. It comes down to the question that we all (even those elected to govern) must ask of ourselves - if change is necessary, even inevitable, do I wait for it to happen, or do I make it happen?
Some may whine about setting dangerous precedents, but I don't believe that doing the Right Thing (tm) is ever dangerous.
Yeah, you can't miss it. It's just south of the Adolf Hitler Center for Cultural Sensitivity, east of the Mark Hamill School of Acting, west of the OJ Simpson Criminal Justice building, and north of the Jesse Ventura College of Political Science.
They did compare solving the quadratic to watching football. Which mindless exercise would you rather engage in?
When I was in HS (lo these many years ago), I didn't write my name on math homework. Instead, where my name was supposed to be, I derived the quadratic formula from a general quadratic equation. I could do it in my sleep...
Slashdot Mirror
So how would France know that the source code matched the binary they were using? Maybe they'll audit each and every line of code, and compile it themselves. But somehow I doubt it.
It's pretty simple to tell if the binary matches the source. You compile the source and compare the binaries. If you are unable to produce the same binaries as you were given, then you don't have the source code.
It's three days later, but just in case you check your posts for replies...
GPL violation != MSEULA violation in ANY way
ALL licenses derive their legal autority from copyright law. Violate the GPL? Violate copyright law. Violate the MS EULA? Violate copyright law.
Just couldn't get through a story without mentioning MS could you?
Nope. Nor could I get through a discussion of the automobile industry without mentionaing Ford, GM, or Chrysler (now Daimler-Chrysler). It's really hard to discuss industry issues without mentioning industry leaders. Industry leaders also make good examples, as most people are familiar with them. Would you know what I was talking about if I mentioned 21COS's EULA? I doubt you've ever heard of the company, let alone read their EULA.
This is one of the best trolls I've seen in a long time.
You want proprietary software, use the GPL.
this is SO fuddy, on so many levels, I hardly know where to start...
Is the GPL proprietary? I don't think so, but let's assume for the sake of argument that it is. (IMHO, this is like assuming that the sky is teal and fuschia plaid, with orange polka dots, but I digress).
Only the software developer chooses the GPL. Software users choose software, and mostly don't care about the license.
If, as a user, you want proprietary software, why limit yourself to GPLed software? There are tens of thousands of restrictive licenses out there.
If, as a developer...ditto the rest of the previous paragraph.
Why is proprietary software bad? In my experience, you are locked into a single provider for support and upgrades. Without a cost-effective competitor, the vendor loses all incentive to perform well. It is impossible to fall into this situation with GPLed software. You can always shop around for better prices and service. Custom apps are kind of an exception to this argument, but that has nothing to do with the license.
It's funny that this rarely gets said.
It's funny that you say that, because it comes up repeatedly in EVERY discussion of the GPL that I've ever seen on this site.
You want freedom, use the BSD license.
Listen to yourself! You are saying "If you want to give people freedom, here is how you should restrict their actions"! WTF? If you want other people to be absolutely unrestricted in their use of your code, place it in the public domain. Any use of any license limits the actions of others.
In other words, "RMS is a nut, therefore the GPL is bad." I love the smell of an ad hominem argument in the morning.
Unisys will run the risk of their intellectual property falling into the public domain
This is so NOT true. You're thinking of trademarks, which must be vigorously defended or they can fall into the public domain (like yoyo, or aspirin). If you hold a copyright or a patent, you own it until it expires or you willingly give it up. You can not lose it through nonenforcement. If what you say were true, then Unisys could not now enforce their patent now after years of letting everyone think it was in the public domain.
As usual, IANAL, but I recently consulted with one over this very issue, and this is what he told me.
If your company is thinking about using MS source code? Well, think twice, because if you do anything that could be construed as a violation, even if it's clearly unintentional, it is going to be met with A HUGE LAWSUIT AND YOU WON'T GET A CHANCE TO ADDRESS IT AT ALL UNTIL YOU COUGH UP SERIOUS DOUGH!!!
How do you feel about OSS software
More importantly, how do you feel about people who use an acronym and then expand part of the acronym? For example,
SAT (or ACT) test
PC computer
SIMM memory
FSF foundation
Is this redundancy morally wrong, or merely non-optimal? And what do you think about the pedants who point these errors out? Jerks, or merely really really bored?
I don't think there's any rational way for a human being to answer your questions, but here's a place to start: www.transhumanist.org. I believe that creating true nanotechnology will be a singular event - no one can predict what will happen as a result of the event; predictions published before the event will seem silly to those who are around after the event has had its effect. Nanotech certainly has the potential for revolutionizing everything, but there's no way to predict the effects.
Don't forget to include slashdot in your citations page...
90% of the posts to this article will sound something like one of the following:
They sued for software patents...then THEY got sued for software patents! That's so ironic! I hope they lose, cause they suck, but I hope they win, because software patents are WRONG!
Intellectual property is different from other property. Software is different from hardware. The patent system needs to be fixed.
IANAL...IANAL...IANAL...IANAL...
Let's start recording our ideas somewhere so the big bad corps can't patent them.
I'm patenting air, so all you people breathing owe me money.
First petrified grits.
Sig11, you are such a karma whore for saying all those things that everyone agrees with.
The $400 MSN rebate "hack" was, IMO, not "ethical" because the deal was presented as quid pro quo
Did you read the terms of the offer? The offer said that you got a $400 rebate, IF you agreed to a long-term contract, UNLESS you lived in California. Taking the money and canceling the contract abided by the letter and spirit of the law and the offer.
A Brief History of Hard Drives
(a la Book-A-Minute).
Scientists: OH NO! Hard drives can't get any better!
Engineers: Wait! Your science is WRONG! (Writes some new equations).
Computer industry: You have SAVED us!
Geeks: YAY!
someone cracks the NT sam file for a bank using l0phtcrack, the fbi is going to go after l0pht, since they wrote the software
I think the FBI would have cause to go after l0pht if they said things like "Our software can be used to crack NT security for banks, so if cracking the security for banks makes you nervous, then you probably shouldn't have anything to do with our project."
Selling a notched strip of spring steel is not illegal. Selling it as a tool to open your car when you lose your keys is not illegal. Selling it as a tool to break into someone else's car is illegal. It's a fine line between saying "This tool I'm selling can be used for illegal things" and saying "Buy this tool I'm selling so you can do illegal things." I think an ambitious federal prosecutor could severely blur the difference between the two.
I'm not saying that this is right; I'm merely saying that I think that Ian has walked into the kill zone of an ambush with a bullseye painted on his torso.
Er... charge him with what? Creating an information storage-retrieval system?
Er...yes. If I create an information retrieval system for the express purpose of disseminating child pornography, and then the system is used for disseminating child pornography, I think the Powers that Be might get a bit upset. You might think that silly, but I guarantee you that, given the sort of statement I quoted, law enforcement officials will NOT be amused. It will be apparent (to them) that this system was created for the express purpose of distributing illegal materials.
Call this flamebait, if you like, but I cannot BELIEVE the naivete of this guy. He has acknowledged, in the worst possible way, that this system can be used for Bad Things. Read this quote:
If you don't want to risk aiding the distribution of "kiddie porn" (which is *already* freely distributed on the Internet anyway), then steer clear of Freenet - it's not for you.
After this thing gets up and running, the FBI will doubtless be all over it. While they may not be able to identify the people who post child pornography, or the people who run the servers, they will certainly be able to identify the guy who helped architect the system. They will find quotes of his like the one above. They will charge him, try him, and convict him, and fry him.
Fool! The ability to shoot or repel bullets is insignificant compared to the power of the Force.
See Womb Raider here.
.pdf viewer)
(Must have a
taking away IRC from them for a day will provide the same effect of denying a cocaine user drugs for a day
Here's a thought - find somebody who uses crack cocaine and tell them you are going to stand there and keep them from using it. Not something I'd want to try...
Are we now to assume that the source code to virii are the same plane as say, angry adolescent poetry?
I wrote a couple pieces in high school describing violent acts. (Don't think I'd try it in today's climate). This is different from carrying out those acts. Displaying source code for a virus could be considered an act of speech, but spreading the virus itself (the binary, not the source) is likely criminal.
Or perhaps software cracks can now be viewed legally as civil disobedience for the digital era -- a charming rebuttal of the profiteering capitalist gluttons dominating the Age of Silicon?
Civil disobedience is illegal and always has been; that's sort of the point. You break the law to demonstrate that the law is wrong, or unjust, or that the punishment does not fit the "crime." During the 1960's, blacks were arrested for sitting where they weren't supposed to, in violation of the law. As any D&D player any D&D player can attest, there's a difference between "lawful" and "good." As the nation saw the unlawful good blacks set upon by the lawful evil authorities, they realized the need for change.
So if you want to write software cracks, go write ahead. Distributing the binaries might get you arrested, fined, and jailed, but maybe that will prove your point. Keep in mind that there is tension between copyright law and free speech, as the Lawrence Lessig article linked to yesterday pointed out, so just because you have the freedom to write cracks doesn't mean that the creators of the cracked software won't sue you.
Any legal minds out there care to offer some perspective?
I'm no lawyer (I hate that little acronym that suggests that I'm anal), but I think we need to distinguish between speech (source code) and action (binaries).
JEEZ! Did you even READ the original post? Let me quote the relevant portion for you; try to engage your brain before responding.
I got news for you, in most non-server environments the proc is still the biggest bottle neck
Hmm..."non-server". Let's say it again together..."non-server." Now, let's read the relevant part of YOUR post:
The computer in question serves files...
Tell me again how your response was relevant to the original post.
Pardon me while I mock this thread.Since your feeble mind isn't going to catch the analogy, I think I'll just sit back and enjoy my self-imposed feelings of superiority.
(/FLAME)
Now, where did I put those hot dogs?
the question is *who* should be remedying this situation
A multi-national, multi-hundred-billion dollar company has too much power. Who but a government can resolve this with any degree of certainty?
A gradual erosion, courtesy of net appliances, the free software movement, or anything else, was the best hope for change
And if MS resasserts dominance? If they prove resilient enough that they embrace and extend non-PC platforms or free software? Who could fix it then? If an entity is too powerful, it isn't enough to state that something, somewhere, sometime may weaken it. It comes down to the question that we all (even those elected to govern) must ask of ourselves - if change is necessary, even inevitable, do I wait for it to happen, or do I make it happen?
Some may whine about setting dangerous precedents, but I don't believe that doing the Right Thing (tm) is ever dangerous.
William H. Gates Center for Software Engineering
Yeah, you can't miss it. It's just south of the Adolf Hitler Center for Cultural Sensitivity, east of the Mark Hamill School of Acting, west of the OJ Simpson Criminal Justice building, and north of the Jesse Ventura College of Political Science.
They did compare solving the quadratic to watching football. Which mindless exercise would you rather engage in?
When I was in HS (lo these many years ago), I didn't write my name on math homework. Instead, where my name was supposed to be, I derived the quadratic formula from a general quadratic equation. I could do it in my sleep...