KRUD is a RedHat based distribution that is well maintained by tummy.com. Monthly CDs in the mail to upgrade from, ensuring that any new install is already a patched install. (no need to spend hours downloading and installing all of the updates released since the CDs were mastered 6 months ago)
Also, they add a number of helpful packages to the distro and provide good repositories for updates. You pay for it, but very very little, especially considering the original poster was asking for a corporate environment.
I don't really know enough about the software patent issue to really make any informed comments, but it sounds like a seriously Bad Idea(TM).
Anyway, what is to stop me from receiving a copy of this draft and changing the "Author" field in Word? until we get multiple verifiable copies of this thing (that we know couldn't have been tampered with by someone who is Anti-patent). This could be a scam, no?
What would be better is if the draft were written by someone at the EU who was using a pirated version of Word that he got from the BSA guy. (Not that he doesn't have oodles of MS software for free...)
Slashdot Mirror
So, does this qualify as prior art to invalidate any music DRM patents?
What's even better is that you didn't need any special schooling to bring AT&T to small claims court. Anyone can do that, law school or not....
KRUD is a RedHat based distribution that is well maintained by tummy.com. Monthly CDs in the mail to upgrade from, ensuring that any new install is already a patched install. (no need to spend hours downloading and installing all of the updates released since the CDs were mastered 6 months ago)
Also, they add a number of helpful packages to the distro and provide good repositories for updates. You pay for it, but very very little, especially considering the original poster was asking for a corporate environment.
I don't really know enough about the software patent issue to really make any informed comments, but it sounds like a seriously Bad Idea(TM).
Anyway, what is to stop me from receiving a copy of this draft and changing the "Author" field in Word? until we get multiple verifiable copies of this thing (that we know couldn't have been tampered with by someone who is Anti-patent). This could be a scam, no?
What would be better is if the draft were written by someone at the EU who was using a pirated version of Word that he got from the BSA guy. (Not that he doesn't have oodles of MS software for free...)
Tomas