First, it's great that Linus has taken the time to explain the situation - Universal Press Syndicate merely shot threatening lawyer letters to webmasters.
Sorry, incorrect. The lawyer letters were fired off, and then came the explanations - to a different audience.
I'm gratified that most of the sites I checked are running Linux but one wonders about linux-diploma.com, linux-masters.com and linuxadvisor.com (Solaris) or linux-fan.com and linuxace.com (FreeBSD). At least I haven't found any running M$ yet.
Why? openbsd.org runs on a Solaris box. That's what sunsite gives them, and they're happy. Not all hosters run Linux.
And that would explain why Microsoft was able to so easily shut down www.microsfot.com, and Sony www.playstatiom.com? As I recall, Sony handed over a hefty sum (six digits) under the table to get that back
... the more it smacks of hypocrisy. Something I hate to say.
I have lost track of the number of cases where we have screamed at the domain name "bullies" who have demanded domains be handed over for 'trademark infringement', only to have the Slashdot hordes scream and kick loudly about how "he got it first", "first come first served", "go to hell".
Now, when someone tries to register a domain involving the 'holy grail' (as many here would equate it to), the shoe is ever so apparently on the other foot.
Tis interesting to see... especially in light of your recent 'attitude' - whether that's changed or just been a onfirmation, I don't know... but you certainly suck up moderation:P (as in vacuum-like)
I hereby find myself guilty of the heinous crime of assumption and sentence myself to ten thwacks of the clue stick.:)
Judging by the other domain names listed (OpenSourceProgram(s|ers|ing).com) it's obvious what their Linux domains would have covered, but these guys are squatters, you actually (generally) would have had a difficult time proving they were infringing his trademark.
It is legally binding, at least in places. In the 80s in the UK, a man sat in a bath of baked beans for a few days. He had it set up, saying that he was doing it for charity.
He got up out of the bath, and decided he needed compensation. So he decided that he was going to 'donate' the money to his own bank account, never a charity to see it.
He was promptly charged with Dishonestly Obtaining Financial Advantage By Deception.
Yeah, there was one mindless twist who openly boasted about setting his threshold to TWO or THREE(!) while moderating! His explanation, "I don't want to see the crap, so I'll browse high". People really should be locked at -1 when moderating, that's just pathetic.
Linus owns the Linux trademark. From this, they're saying that he is picking and choosing who has 'approval' to use said trademark.
Fair enough. Just as Microsoft is the arbiter of who uses their trademarks.
I really hope that all those other sites have done as this site claims, or else there is the question of selectivity. As in "Anyone can create a Linux distribution, and call it xyz Linux or whatever, but should you wish to market it, you need Linus' approval?"
This is a bit worrisome.
I use a piece of software called WinGuard. This is like saying Microsoft could pick and choose titling and naming. Think about winfiles.com too.
This is all a little ambiguous, I haven't had enough coffee yet, but apply some lateral thinking. I'm not screaming, I'm just trying to evaluate this.
Yes, I hate the idea of domain squatting. It sucks.
Linus owns Linux' trademark. But is he the arbiter of all things Linux? I don't think so, and I don't think he thinks so either. Someone mentioned using this to try to squash LinuxOne. I don't like that idea at all, much as I dislike what they're trying to do. It sounds very slippery (as in the slope).
This is becoming the cliche of the people who don't get it. It's clever and all but it has nothing to do with open mindedness or not, it's about freedom. If you're happy being a slave then you naturally don't understand. If you can demonstrate the closed minded nature of the movement I'd like to see it. There is nothing closed minded about having freedom and refusing to give it up.
No, it's more becoming the cliche of people who have been around for quite a while and have watched things, in their opinions, deteriorate from an 'ideal' to a 'whining foot stomping'.
Here is an example: Why don't you volunteer to go to prison so you can see if you like being locked up. We'll let you out when you think you've had a good enough taste of it to make a decision, how does this sound? You've never been to prison before so clearly you don't know if you like it or not. It's closed minded of you to not try it, isn't it?
Bad analogy. I don't want to try it. I could, however. I don't have to. I use proprietary and free software, both, and I have no qualms about either. The key issue is I'm not 'forcing' (or attempting to) others to accept that interest.
"Ring a bell? Open your minds, get off the open source kick, and welcome anything that makes our lives better." (emphasis added)
There are more important things than making our lives better. I could hit you in the head with a bat and take your money, it would make my life better because I'd have more money, is that the right thing to do? Out of curiosity, how exactly would BeOS make my life better, what apps does it have? Can it do anything for me at all?
Besides the argument that he was referring to the collective populace when using the word "our" and you were referring to none but you, name one thing more important than making your life better. Besides, perhaps, survival, which could be argued to be a variant thereof.
This also ignores your prattling hypocrisy about how you should be allowed to dictate what others do, and how others are "rude morons" for not choosing/having the same likes as you.
Who were you kidding thinking Be meant to? Their market is professional (studio) graphics and video, multimedia. Areas that they piss all over MS... andLinux.
Slashdot Mirror
Sorry, incorrect. The lawyer letters were fired off, and then came the explanations - to a different audience.
I had to do something to bring you out of the woodwork! ;-)
Why? openbsd.org runs on a Solaris box. That's what sunsite gives them, and they're happy. Not all hosters run Linux.
...egistered.
Wrong. Linuxlover's porno has nothing to do with an Operating System. Perfectly legal.
Current Bids: 0 (Yes, zero. nada. zip. big friggin' surprise)
There are a few of us now, and seem to be snowballing in numbers ;)
Open Source is a concept. A generic concept. Unpatentable. Able to be used by many. So many should be able to benefit.
If I were to start an Open Source Programming house I would be quite 'peeved' if I could not use that domain for trademark infringements.
That would sound to me almost like 'predatory trademarking'
And that would explain why Microsoft was able to so easily shut down www.microsfot.com, and Sony www.playstatiom.com? As I recall, Sony handed over a hefty sum (six digits) under the table to get that back
I have lost track of the number of cases where we have screamed at the domain name "bullies" who have demanded domains be handed over for 'trademark infringement', only to have the Slashdot hordes scream and kick loudly about how "he got it first", "first come first served", "go to hell".
Now, when someone tries to register a domain involving the 'holy grail' (as many here would equate it to), the shoe is ever so apparently on the other foot.
He cannot revoke their GPL. No more than you can summarily revoke Microsoft's EULA.
Tis interesting to see... especially in light of your recent 'attitude' - whether that's changed or just been a onfirmation, I don't know... but you certainly suck up moderation :P (as in vacuum-like)
I hereby find myself guilty of the heinous crime of assumption and sentence myself to ten thwacks of the clue stick. :)
Judging by the other domain names listed (OpenSourceProgram(s|ers|ing).com) it's obvious what their Linux domains would have covered, but these guys are squatters, you actually (generally) would have had a difficult time proving they were infringing his trademark.
Win or lose, your lawyers usually win, unfortunately.
He got up out of the bath, and decided he needed compensation. So he decided that he was going to 'donate' the money to his own bank account, never a charity to see it.
He was promptly charged with Dishonestly Obtaining Financial Advantage By Deception.
Yeah, there was one mindless twist who openly boasted about setting his threshold to TWO or THREE(!) while moderating! His explanation, "I don't want to see the crap, so I'll browse high". People really should be locked at -1 when moderating, that's just pathetic.
That said, judging by your posting times, you don't seem to do a lot of work ;)
*duck*
Fair enough. Just as Microsoft is the arbiter of who uses their trademarks.
I really hope that all those other sites have done as this site claims, or else there is the question of selectivity. As in "Anyone can create a Linux distribution, and call it xyz Linux or whatever, but should you wish to market it, you need Linus' approval?"
This is a bit worrisome.
I use a piece of software called WinGuard. This is like saying Microsoft could pick and choose titling and naming. Think about winfiles.com too.
This is all a little ambiguous, I haven't had enough coffee yet, but apply some lateral thinking. I'm not screaming, I'm just trying to evaluate this.
Yes, I hate the idea of domain squatting. It sucks.
Linus owns Linux' trademark. But is he the arbiter of all things Linux? I don't think so, and I don't think he thinks so either. Someone mentioned using this to try to squash LinuxOne. I don't like that idea at all, much as I dislike what they're trying to do. It sounds very slippery (as in the slope).
No, it's more becoming the cliche of people who have been around for quite a while and have watched things, in their opinions, deteriorate from an 'ideal' to a 'whining foot stomping'.
Here is an example: Why don't you volunteer to go to prison so you can see if you like being locked up. We'll let you out when you think you've had a good enough taste of it to make a decision, how does this sound? You've never been to prison before so clearly you don't know if you like it or not. It's closed minded of you to not try it, isn't it?
Bad analogy. I don't want to try it. I could, however. I don't have to. I use proprietary and free software, both, and I have no qualms about either. The key issue is I'm not 'forcing' (or attempting to) others to accept that interest.
"Ring a bell? Open your minds, get off the open source kick, and welcome anything that makes our lives better." (emphasis added)
There are more important things than making our lives better. I could hit you in the head with a bat and take your money, it would make my life better because I'd have more money, is that the right thing to do? Out of curiosity, how exactly would BeOS make my life better, what apps does it have? Can it do anything for me at all?
Besides the argument that he was referring to the collective populace when using the word "our" and you were referring to none but you, name one thing more important than making your life better. Besides, perhaps, survival, which could be argued to be a variant thereof.
It would be, but unfortunately would be representative of a lot fewer of the Slashdot population these days, more is the pity.
What? Like producing multimedia cinematics/film/adverts/tv effects where "being able to spin 6 mpegs on a cube" is much more than a "parlour trick"?
This also ignores your prattling hypocrisy about how you should be allowed to dictate what others do, and how others are "rude morons" for not choosing/having the same likes as you.
Who were you kidding thinking Be meant to? Their market is professional (studio) graphics and video, multimedia. Areas that they piss all over MS ... andLinux.
Or rather: <robotic voice>Exterminate! Exterminate!</robotic voice>
"Come on folks! Let's all email <xyz> and show `em just how much we want an Open Source version of this product!"
*sigh*