It is very possible to do this under the GPL. The key wording is on top of the GPL. The developers' contributions would still be available to everybody (including SCO) under the GPL, but if SCO wants to relicense them in a non-GPL compatible way, they absolutely must get a seperate license on top of the GPL that allows this from every kernel developer.
By 'better integration of links and web content', I guess I mean 'I don't really care that the information has come from an Apache server or an NNTP server, or in my email'.
Gnus has various mail backends, a slashdot backend, an ultimate bulletin board backend and an rss backend among others. "Virtual" and "Kiboze" groups can include groups from any combination of transports.
I've *no idea* whether this is the kind of thing MS (or anyone else) is thinking of
I doubt it. For starters, this came from MS Research, so chances are it won't turn into anything concrete. And if it does, its likely to be something like nnkiboze with dumbed down regexps and maybe a paperclip.
Gnus (the newsreader built into Emacs) has done 1 - 3 for years now. See "kiboze" groups, automatic score files, and the ability to find URLs in posts and make them active.
Maybe the caching or article copying features could satisfy 4.
It's MS's worst nightmare that Windows would have GPL-licensed code checked in, as they could conceivably be forced to open-source the whole product.
Well, looks like you got modded up. But you're wrong just the same.
In general, it you are correct that a court would be more likely to order a company to pay damages and stop distributing infringing code. But Microsoft has been convicted of anti-trust violations in the past, so a judge might impose harsher penalties, like demanding that Microsoft retrospectively comply with the full terms of the license (ie release their source under the GPL). It is not a chance that Microsoft would want to take.
An artist can draw a page in his favorite application, export to HTML, the coder only has to fill the blanks.
And if the artist's favorite application happens to be MS-*, good luck filling in the blanks.
I'm having trouble working out from your post what exactly the advantages of PHP are over JSPs. Everything you mention is easily available as a Java library, and standard tag library has most of the more useful things for web pages (SQL, gettext) covered so you don't need to write code to use them.
Really? I see "Apparatus and method to obtain representative samples of oil well production" in my search. It looks like AT&T patented instant messaging in 6,212,548.
However, in 6,539,421, AOL patented auto-completion of instant messaging addresses. This blatently should not have been awarded, as auto-completion has been around a long time for other purposes, including email addresses, so it is an obvious step to apply it to instant messaging addresses.
If that is the case, other software could not support this format of secure zip file without a license
Not quite. They can't patent the format itself, only their method of producing that format. If someone can find another method of producing the same format that does not infringe the patent, then other software can support it without a license.
This was the case with the GIF patent; someone found a way to decode GIFs that did not infringe, which made libungif possible. But noone managed to come up with a non-infringing encoder, so only uncompressed gifs could be produced by libungif.
Hahahaha. The GNU/Linux 'kernel developers' are without backbones when it comes to lawsuits.
Look at the Virgin Webplayer. It was in violation, but no one wanted to take on Virgin's lawyers.
Do you know for a fact that there was not an out of court settlement? Virgin stopped distrbuting those devices long ago. The FSF for one usually tries to resolve disputes quietly and without needing to go to court.
So download the RPM of the binaries and write to them requesting a copy of the source. If they refuse to comply, then contact the kernel authors with evidence of the GPL violation.
So far only SCO claims to have evidence that there is non-GPLed code in the kernel. Until they make their claims publically available, other distributors have no reason to stop distributing. At that point, Linux can move forward, and Red Hat, Debian and the rest might have to go a few weeks with no kernels available for download. The fact that Red Hat has decided to stop distributing CDROMs makes me wonder whether they are already preparing for this scenario. It will be a lot easier and less costly to pull a few files from their FTP sites for a few weeks than to recall thousands of CDROMs from store shelves.
you can only make these payments within Japan if you are a Japanese citizen.
Not true. I am not a Japanese citizen, and I have used one of these ATMs to transfer money to someone elses bank account (not anonymously, since I wanted them to know it was me paying the bill, but entering identifying details was optional). I did not even have a bank account in Japan at the time, I just put the cash I wanted to transfer into the machine. This was not some small Hakidao hamlet (whereever that is), it was downtown Kita-Kyushu (pop. 1M).
I beleive that between Linus, Alan Cox and a handful of others (companies like IBM, HP and SGI have no shortage of lawyers, and are all major copyright holders over kernel code), a majority can be found. The court is not going to insist that some guy that contributed a 10 line bug fix has the same share over the kernel as Linus, so while there might be hundreds of contributors, only a few key ones will be needed to back this.
Yes the lack of copyright assignment will be a barrier, but not a huge one.
as has been pointed out above, they are still distributing the source from their ftp site, so they are still in compliance with the gpl.
It is a violation of the GPL to knowingly distribute GPLed works linked with non-GPL compatible works. So either SCO are making baseless claims which they have no intention of following up, or they are currently in violation of the GPL. Everyone else who is distributing the Linux kernel has the defense that SCO has not yet made their claims known, and by continuing to distribute the code themselves are giving a clear signal that there is no reason to stop distributing it.
Linus did not sign a contract allegedly assigning SCO rights over his code. So even if it was a "derivitive of UNIX", SCO would not own any rights to it unless there were patents involved (which has already been scrutinized and found not to be the case).
He even goes on to say that since there is any proprietary code in the kernel, that the GPL itself is nullified as a valid license for the kernel.
He may be right there, but it does not give SCO the right to relicense the work of Linus Torvalds, Alan Cox, IBM, HP, SGI and others under their own terms.
If SCO's claims are right (and they have yet to offer ANY evidence in their favour), then the only legal solution is for everyone to stop distributing the Linux kernel until the offending code is replaced.
"We only made these files available via the 'FTP' program, which is only for highly advanced technical individuals such as corporate IT managers, for the convenience of our paying customers.
And I assume the Judge is supposed to take the view that GPL violation is OK as long as the customers are paying to be violated.
Re:the slashdot story is mis-interpreting the post
on
LGPL is Viral for Java
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
The only comment from "the FSF-license guy" in he linked article is:
This sort of linking falls under section 6 of the LGPL.
6. As an exception to the Sections above, you may also combine or link a "work that uses the Library" with the Library to produce a work containing portions of the Library, and distribute that work under terms of your choice, provided that the terms permit modification of the work for the customer's own use and reverse engineering for debugging such modifications
Someone has misinterpreted the comment to mean the opposite and we now have articles being printed left right and center spreading FUD about the LGPL and Java. Thanks a lot Slashdot, Microsoft couldn't have done it better.
Nothing in the HTML standards mandates Javascript support. The two are orthoganal, and there are many HTML browsers that do not support Javascript especially in the PDA and mobile phone world.
Slashdot Mirror
It is very possible to do this under the GPL. The key wording is on top of the GPL. The developers' contributions would still be available to everybody (including SCO) under the GPL, but if SCO wants to relicense them in a non-GPL compatible way, they absolutely must get a seperate license on top of the GPL that allows this from every kernel developer.
As for the left hand not knowing what the right hand is doing, I have never seen a large (or even medium sized) company where this was not the case.
The movie (Timeline) is out in November. This is nothing but old fashioned spam sent out by/on behalf of Paramount Pictures.
Gnus has various mail backends, a slashdot backend, an ultimate bulletin board backend and an rss backend among others. "Virtual" and "Kiboze" groups can include groups from any combination of transports.
I've *no idea* whether this is the kind of thing MS (or anyone else) is thinking of
I doubt it. For starters, this came from MS Research, so chances are it won't turn into anything concrete. And if it does, its likely to be something like nnkiboze with dumbed down regexps and maybe a paperclip.
Gnus (the newsreader built into Emacs) has done 1 - 3 for years now. See "kiboze" groups, automatic score files, and the ability to find URLs in posts and make them active. Maybe the caching or article copying features could satisfy 4.
Welcome to slashdot. Try substituting XSL for CSS, and things might start to make sense.
And if the artist's favorite application happens to be MS-*, good luck filling in the blanks.
I'm having trouble working out from your post what exactly the advantages of PHP are over JSPs. Everything you mention is easily available as a Java library, and standard tag library has most of the more useful things for web pages (SQL, gettext) covered so you don't need to write code to use them.
Really? I see "Apparatus and method to obtain representative samples of oil well production" in my search. It looks like AT&T patented instant messaging in 6,212,548.
However, in 6,539,421, AOL patented auto-completion of instant messaging addresses. This blatently should not have been awarded, as auto-completion has been around a long time for other purposes, including email addresses, so it is an obvious step to apply it to instant messaging addresses.
Not quite. They can't patent the format itself, only their method of producing that format. If someone can find another method of producing the same format that does not infringe the patent, then other software can support it without a license.
This was the case with the GIF patent; someone found a way to decode GIFs that did not infringe, which made libungif possible. But noone managed to come up with a non-infringing encoder, so only uncompressed gifs could be produced by libungif.
Just a minor point - there is no such thing as "the pence". Pence is the plural of penny.
Really? I thought they were moving production there to get around trade barriers.
For this? (linked off the "Products" page of their main site): http://www.sco.com/company/scosource/intellectual_ property/
Look at the Virgin Webplayer. It was in violation, but no one wanted to take on Virgin's lawyers. Do you know for a fact that there was not an out of court settlement? Virgin stopped distrbuting those devices long ago. The FSF for one usually tries to resolve disputes quietly and without needing to go to court.
So download the RPM of the binaries and write to them requesting a copy of the source. If they refuse to comply, then contact the kernel authors with evidence of the GPL violation.
So far only SCO claims to have evidence that there is non-GPLed code in the kernel. Until they make their claims publically available, other distributors have no reason to stop distributing. At that point, Linux can move forward, and Red Hat, Debian and the rest might have to go a few weeks with no kernels available for download. The fact that Red Hat has decided to stop distributing CDROMs makes me wonder whether they are already preparing for this scenario. It will be a lot easier and less costly to pull a few files from their FTP sites for a few weeks than to recall thousands of CDROMs from store shelves.
Not true. I am not a Japanese citizen, and I have used one of these ATMs to transfer money to someone elses bank account (not anonymously, since I wanted them to know it was me paying the bill, but entering identifying details was optional). I did not even have a bank account in Japan at the time, I just put the cash I wanted to transfer into the machine. This was not some small Hakidao hamlet (whereever that is), it was downtown Kita-Kyushu (pop. 1M).
Yes the lack of copyright assignment will be a barrier, but not a huge one.
It is a violation of the GPL to knowingly distribute GPLed works linked with non-GPL compatible works. So either SCO are making baseless claims which they have no intention of following up, or they are currently in violation of the GPL. Everyone else who is distributing the Linux kernel has the defense that SCO has not yet made their claims known, and by continuing to distribute the code themselves are giving a clear signal that there is no reason to stop distributing it.
Linus did not sign a contract allegedly assigning SCO rights over his code. So even if it was a "derivitive of UNIX", SCO would not own any rights to it unless there were patents involved (which has already been scrutinized and found not to be the case).
(9) Will suddenly drop the case when their share price is inflated enough, and immediately offer themselves for sale.
He may be right there, but it does not give SCO the right to relicense the work of Linus Torvalds, Alan Cox, IBM, HP, SGI and others under their own terms.
If SCO's claims are right (and they have yet to offer ANY evidence in their favour), then the only legal solution is for everyone to stop distributing the Linux kernel until the offending code is replaced.
And I assume the Judge is supposed to take the view that GPL violation is OK as long as the customers are paying to be violated.
6. As an exception to the Sections above, you may also combine or link a "work that uses the Library" with the Library to produce a work containing portions of the Library, and distribute that work under terms of your choice, provided that the terms permit modification of the work for the customer's own use and reverse engineering for debugging such modifications
Someone has misinterpreted the comment to mean the opposite and we now have articles being printed left right and center spreading FUD about the LGPL and Java. Thanks a lot Slashdot, Microsoft couldn't have done it better.
Nothing in the HTML standards mandates Javascript support. The two are orthoganal, and there are many HTML browsers that do not support Javascript especially in the PDA and mobile phone world.