The crime originated in the US, so the US has rights to prosecute. The crime had implications in Canada, so Canada has rights to prosecute. However, the US got the guy, and the US doesn't extradite until there are no outstanding charges on the guy.
This is for repeated threats over a period of two months. Consider that before judging this guy. (Unless, of course, you're one of those few who actually read the article.)
Because the crime originated in the US. Just because there's some hint of the word "international" doesn't immediately mean the suspect gets off scot free.
Students and faculty in OSU's CIS department can get W2k3 Server for free through MSDNAA, so it's definitely cheaper than RHEL, but it doesn't come with support.
But when a banner abuses it's animation capabilities or tries to become a popup, I draw the line. If a banner isn't animated, there's a chance I might even click on it.
Yes, but not in the manner you're referring to. The GPL is fundamentally different from an EULA. An EULA restricts the rights you already have (by buying a piece of software at a store you are given a right to install and use that software (at least, in theory)). The GPL is only a license for redistribution--you do not have to agree to it, but nothing else gives you the right to redistribute the software.
If the GPL was found invalid by some judge, all of copyright law would be undone, which includes EULAs.
Isn't the MPL compatible with the GPL and LGPL? That would mean Lindows could release it under the MPL, but the Mozilla Foundation could re-release it under the MPL/GPL/LGPL.
I know there are a lot of geeks out there who will blast this effort as unnecessary--they are the same people who believe the best HTML editor is really a text-editor with an HTML quick-reference sheet handy...
Bah! Nerds don't need "quick-reference" sheets for HTML!
Slashdot Mirror
That is, if Gov. Taft signs the bill into law.
If you're a cop, arrest a news crew for this. The law is in the books, and I'm sure the news crew will take care of educating the public afterwards.
The crime originated in the US, so the US has rights to prosecute. The crime had implications in Canada, so Canada has rights to prosecute. However, the US got the guy, and the US doesn't extradite until there are no outstanding charges on the guy.
There is a difference between them ignoring his valid complaints and their ignoring his harassment of them for two months. I don't know which applies.
This is for repeated threats over a period of two months. Consider that before judging this guy. (Unless, of course, you're one of those few who actually read the article.)
Because the crime originated in the US. Just because there's some hint of the word "international" doesn't immediately mean the suspect gets off scot free.
Umm...how exactly are rape and spam related? I agree with your points, but not with how you made them. Please use more appropriate comparisons.
Crime of passion--you'll still get charged but you have a good chance in front of a jury.
Gateway sells servers?
Ok, I only knew his formal name, and it looked like a typo to me.
...is Spencer Abraham.
...SCO is now suing Forbes.
Students and faculty in OSU's CIS department can get W2k3 Server for free through MSDNAA, so it's definitely cheaper than RHEL, but it doesn't come with support.
But when a banner abuses it's animation capabilities or tries to become a popup, I draw the line. If a banner isn't animated, there's a chance I might even click on it.
I'm seeing it on the IMAX this evening. Look for an IMAX theater showing it near you.
Yes, but not in the manner you're referring to. The GPL is fundamentally different from an EULA. An EULA restricts the rights you already have (by buying a piece of software at a store you are given a right to install and use that software (at least, in theory)). The GPL is only a license for redistribution--you do not have to agree to it, but nothing else gives you the right to redistribute the software.
If the GPL was found invalid by some judge, all of copyright law would be undone, which includes EULAs.
The MPL doesn't require derivative works to be contributed back to Mozilla.
Isn't the MPL compatible with the GPL and LGPL? That would mean Lindows could release it under the MPL, but the Mozilla Foundation could re-release it under the MPL/GPL/LGPL.
No. Netscape added proprietary features such as AOL Instant Messanger to Netscape.
I would assume the states get money for the criminal violations they're pursuing, and customers will get refunds.