If they have box running the firmwire, they have the binaries.
GPL v2 only speaks about:"object code or executable" . Do you have the executable if you use a washing machine running linux? do you have the executable if you access a device of the LAn, do you have a executable if you run an application on a gpl webserver? Where exactly is the limit? (Note: shis is a real problem with gpl libraries.) The gpl is not clear about this, and a vendor will explain it his way. Do you want to sue a chinese vendor over something that is unclear to get the sources of your dvd player?
Bill could actually revoke Linus' right to distribute the linux kernel!
It might not be possible to distibute it under gplv3, but that part was licences under gpl v2. and ssince you licenced it under gplv2 it may still be distibuted under point 4:
4.......However, parties who have received copies, or rights, from you under this License will not have their licenses terminated so long as such parties remain in full compliance.
That makes the gpl inrrevokeable.
Nice thought expriment, but i would liked to have seen the part of the licence that would be violated.
but Bill could probably sue the shit out of them all anyways. As always this is true. He could be "not right" but still sue, as the sco tries. MS could sue many many small competitors to death.
Imagine a embedded device running linux. You can use it but the distibuter gives you no updated "firmware" and thus no binaries. The only way to find out it runs linux is to "hack" it.
This might a way builders of embedded hardware try to circomvent the GPL since they give you no access to the binaries. (This is the way the embeded hardware builder would explain it, this is open to discussion. )
Now comes the strange part: give out firmware updates would violate the GPL. now lets talk about stupid.
I can image this is done server side. Coping a file over internet or copying + appling a drm is not that complicated. (as complicated as an http or ssl link, that can be doen in real time)
The wrong way would be encrypting the commnication of the file and then applieng the drm client side. Since itunes can be reverse engineered the encryption module can be copied into pymusique.
Google shoudl try as many different approached for these kind of spam words:
1. Some high ranking sites where you can play online poker for money. 2. Some High ranking sites that are absolutely NOT commercial. 3. term definition like wiki 4. a page how to fight the spam. no follow tag 5 A site that explains how to beat the system of poker.
the blogged articke states: "If a Google user searches for online poker they probably want to play online poker. "
This is not true. This will lead to 999 commercial sites that play are in result 1...999 that play the SEO game and all the other viewpoint i came to think about will be invisible.
not the best program too choose to compare limewire to.
instead of e-donkey, he could have choosen e-mule , which happens to be a gpl replacement.
i believe there is also a replacement of morpheus, but i rather use specialsed p2p clients. (I think shareaza is comaparable to morpheus. which happens to be.... gpl.
Mozilla was a long time a developement framework However developeing a browser is much more inspiring that building a framework.
So i think the question "should we release mozilla 1.8" is a valid question since it is starting too lose from thunderbird/firefox. Maybe they just should maintain a Unstable(trunk) and an stable (1.7.x) branch and let the forking (foxfire/thunderbird/minimoz) make the applications.
Sending TCP packet with SYN flag set, source and destination IP address and source and destination port as of destination machine, results in 15-30 seconds DoS condition.
SO sending every 10 seconds such a packet to a windows internet (http) host will make it disappear form the internet? DOS attack? that is lame.
You cannot just start working on the firefox/mozilla source. It is one bloated big piece of ????. I did not even manage to compile it without downloading pre-setup environments. It took years and years to build this monster, and it is very very hard to control.
I am not saying that this a bad thing. But it is not helping to make it a community thing. I cannot see ways how this is going to change because there is just a lot of functionality in it that cannot be simplified (some code could be helped by rewriting some parts, but the total complexity stays)
Firefox is great because it has a clear target: a desktop browser for the average user. Mozilla is not that great because it is not one thing. Thunderbird is good as a mail client, but fails as an outlook replacement, or a as news client (and fails as a binary download news client).
And reviewing/crushing bugs is not that great work as opposing to hacking new code.
I thing the succes story's of mozilla will be branches that specialize in one thing. Do one thing great, and get merged back into the main mozilla client later. (things like desktop search, outlook replacement,Content mangememnet, composer,mobile mozilla, and things i did not hear of yet, or are only in the mind of some people)
linus should patent one of MS security flaws AND the patch for it. MS would have to pay a license either to use the flawed product or the patched version.
or even better s/linus/IBM/ becuase you need deep pockets to fight MS.
Did you UNDERSTAND it? (New is that the patent is actually linked in this story)
Kill kill kill. 1. This is an obvious (ok, advanced,optimized ) method to scan for virusses. More or less they create a kind of vm to simulate if a program behaves like a virus. 2. creating an virtual environment/sandbox to see how a virus behaves is nothing new.
This kind of patent decription is not enough to recreate the system. That is what i understood for patents. By revealing the details of your invention it allows for others to use the invetion after expiration of the invention. However major parts are missing. (what p-code, what entry points?)
Don't understimate the power of a 2 year old and computers. He might not be able to hack the device, but it better be VERY strong to survive a 2 year old child. (think about strong physical abuse, feeding the bear milk, spilled food, kissing the camera).
don't forget Arnie lost from the children in kindergarten cop.
That is the exact same reasoning people used for windows-95. Such an intensively tested product could not contain any errors. Could it? Suprisenly several people here mention it. Could they all be wrong?
But beware of the dark side. Anger... fear... aggression. The dark side are they. Easily they flow, quick to join you in a fight. If once you start down the dark path, forever will it dominate your destiny, consume you it will,
That is the path the anti-virus company's follow. They go for quick profit. They do not manage to completely erradicate virus ever. They do not help against phishing attacks, they do not help against spyware, you need to buy another product for that. and all those products together do your pc as much harm as the first virus that comes along.
Fear: mcafee popup's a Warning about a virus every few days, that on very very close inspections was not intercepted, but it was just just advertising it could help against. fear......
By the way, notice that macafee never call it DEP, but use their own marketing talk for it. If i just figured out what this virusscanning software did. (I t does not block spyware, that is for sure)
They are not valid, but some pantents are asigned. Most patents use the workarround by describing the software as an thng that is accompagnied by some hardware (that is the decompression chip).
I have not yet figured out how they are able to produce sell here 50 Euro (retail) dvd players that cost 10-20 dollar in licenses
They "loose 3.5 billion". THey sue 20.000 john doe's so that is 150.000 dollar per john doe. (well actually they sue 23,333.33 people)
Don't forget this is all about getting press coverage and scare tactics. Even they realize that suing 20.000 people does not really make a difference. And today they got free coverage by slashdot (and tomorrow they will get it again! 8) )
(and forget the fact that a large loss is the printing machines in the far east that are chewing out mass amounts of copies of the dvd's, the mpaa is also powerless about)
Slashdot Mirror
If they have box running the firmwire, they have the binaries.
GPL v2 only speaks about:"object code or executable" . Do you have the executable if you use a washing machine running linux? do you have the executable if you access a device of the LAn, do you have a executable if you run an application on a gpl webserver? Where exactly is the limit? (Note: shis is a real problem with gpl libraries.) The gpl is not clear about this, and a vendor will explain it his way. Do you want to sue a chinese vendor over something that is unclear to get the sources of your dvd player?
The gpl should be clear about this.
Bill could actually revoke Linus' right to distribute the linux kernel!
......However, parties who have received copies, or rights, from you under this License will not have their licenses terminated so long as such parties remain in full compliance.
It might not be possible to distibute it under gplv3, but that part was licences under gpl v2. and ssince you licenced it under gplv2 it may still be distibuted under point 4:
4.
That makes the gpl inrrevokeable.
Nice thought expriment, but i would liked to have seen the part of the licence that would be violated.
but Bill could probably sue the shit out of them all anyways.
As always this is true. He could be "not right" but still sue, as the sco tries. MS could sue many many small competitors to death.
That would be pretty stupid.
Imagine a embedded device running linux. You can use it but the distibuter gives you no updated "firmware" and thus no binaries. The only way to find out it runs linux is to "hack" it.
This might a way builders of embedded hardware try to circomvent the GPL since they give you no access to the binaries. (This is the way the embeded hardware builder would explain it, this is open to discussion. )
Now comes the strange part: give out firmware updates would violate the GPL. now lets talk about stupid.
Just take the rules, add "over internet" to it and sue hasbro.
I can image this is done server side. Coping a file over internet or copying + appling a drm is not that complicated. (as complicated as an http or ssl link, that can be doen in real time)
The wrong way would be encrypting the commnication of the file and then applieng the drm client side. Since itunes can be reverse engineered the encryption module can be copied into pymusique.
You are so right. I am so used to duplicates i did not even bother to RTFA.
Now if did read the article, it does not REALLY give any new information.
Instead of tracking gpl violations the editors of /. should spend some time tracking duplicate stories"
Moderators, don't mod this up, since i will repost this comment on a new story next monday.
Google shoudl try as many different approached for these kind of spam words:
1. Some high ranking sites where you can play online poker for money.
2. Some High ranking sites that are absolutely NOT commercial.
3. term definition like wiki
4. a page how to fight the spam. no follow tag
5 A site that explains how to beat the system of poker.
the blogged articke states:
"If a Google user searches for online poker they probably want to play online poker. "
This is not true. This will lead to 999 commercial sites that play are in result 1...999 that play the SEO game and all the other viewpoint i came to think about will be invisible.
Why did i read "SCO" disappointed?
not the best program too choose to compare limewire to.
.... gpl.
instead of e-donkey, he could have choosen e-mule , which happens to be a gpl replacement.
i believe there is also a replacement of morpheus, but i rather use specialsed p2p clients. (I think shareaza is comaparable to morpheus. which happens to be
compare with the worst and you look just fine.
Mozilla was a long time a developement framework
However developeing a browser is much more inspiring that building a framework.
So i think the question "should we release mozilla 1.8" is a valid question since it is starting too lose from thunderbird/firefox. Maybe they just should maintain a Unstable(trunk) and an stable (1.7.x) branch and let the forking (foxfire/thunderbird/minimoz) make the applications.
Mozilla will die... long live mozilla!
drop it twice BOFH style
if i read correct:
Sending TCP packet with SYN flag set, source and destination IP address and source
and destination port as of destination machine, results in 15-30 seconds DoS condition.
SO sending every 10 seconds such a packet to a windows internet (http) host will make it disappear form the internet? DOS attack? that is lame.
You cannot just start working on the firefox/mozilla source. It is one bloated big piece of ????. I did not even manage to compile it without downloading pre-setup environments. It took years and years to build this monster, and it is very very hard to control.
/crushing bugs is not that great work as opposing to hacking new code.
I am not saying that this a bad thing. But it is not helping to make it a community thing. I cannot see ways how this is going to change because there is just a lot of functionality in it that cannot be simplified (some code could be helped by rewriting some parts, but the total complexity stays)
Firefox is great because it has a clear target: a desktop browser for the average user. Mozilla is not that great because it is not one thing. Thunderbird is good as a mail client, but fails as an outlook replacement, or a as news client (and fails as a binary download news client).
And reviewing
I thing the succes story's of mozilla will be branches that specialize in one thing. Do one thing great, and get merged back into the main mozilla client later.
(things like desktop search, outlook replacement,Content mangememnet, composer,mobile mozilla, and things i did not hear of yet, or are only in the mind of some people)
My beowulf cluster of computers.
No no...
linus should patent one of MS security flaws AND the patch for it. MS would have to pay a license either to use the flawed product or the patched version.
or even better s/linus/IBM/ becuase you need deep pockets to fight MS.
(and i should patent this idea) 8)
Did you UNDERSTAND it? (New is that the patent is actually linked in this story)
Kill kill kill.
1. This is an obvious (ok, advanced,optimized ) method to scan for virusses. More or less they create a kind of vm to simulate if a program behaves like a virus.
2. creating an virtual environment/sandbox to see how a virus behaves is nothing new.
This kind of patent decription is not enough to recreate the system. That is what i understood for patents. By revealing the details of your invention it allows for others to use the invetion after expiration of the invention. However major parts are missing. (what p-code, what entry points?)
I am still aginst this purely software patents.
Don't understimate the power of a 2 year old and computers. He might not be able to hack the device, but it better be VERY strong to survive a 2 year old child. (think about strong physical abuse, feeding the bear milk, spilled food, kissing the camera).
don't forget Arnie lost from the children in kindergarten cop.
The first pool that is not really an poll. and cowboynealOS option is missing.
That is the exact same reasoning people used for windows-95. Such an intensively tested product could not contain any errors. Could it? Suprisenly several people here mention it. Could they all be wrong?
But beware of the dark side. Anger... fear... aggression. The dark side are they. Easily they flow, quick to join you in a fight. If once you start down the dark path, forever will it dominate your destiny, consume you it will,
That is the path the anti-virus company's follow. They go for quick profit. They do not manage to completely erradicate virus ever. They do not help against phishing attacks, they do not help against spyware, you need to buy another product for that. and all those products together do your pc as much harm as the first virus that comes along.
Fear: mcafee popup's a Warning about a virus every few days, that on very very close inspections was not intercepted, but it was just just advertising it could help against. fear......
What makes this old news.
By the way, notice that macafee never call it DEP, but use their own marketing talk for it. If i just figured out what this virusscanning software did. (I t does not block spyware, that is for sure)
They are not valid, but some pantents are asigned. Most patents use the workarround by describing the software as an thng that is accompagnied by some hardware (that is the decompression chip).
I have not yet figured out how they are able to produce sell here 50 Euro (retail) dvd players that cost 10-20 dollar in licenses
That is math.
They "loose 3.5 billion". THey sue 20.000 john doe's so that is 150.000 dollar per john doe. (well actually they sue 23,333.33 people)
Don't forget this is all about getting press coverage and scare tactics. Even they realize that suing 20.000 people does not really make a difference. And today they got free coverage by slashdot (and tomorrow they will get it again! 8) )
(and forget the fact that a large loss is the printing machines in the far east that are chewing out mass amounts of copies of the dvd's, the mpaa is also powerless about)
At least the (non englisch) deaf person on this earth will have to switch to linux and other non activation OS.