.. must be liable too. It's their damn bricks that make the roads that allow trucks with computer equipment to reach the ISP centre where, once installed, music may be travelling through.
If SCO's case ever hits the courtroom, this incident might mean that it's impossible for them to claim anyone knowingly added SCO property to the Linux kernel.
For all we know, they could have been doing it themselves...
Rob's Pattent Trade Office will grant you any patent you like! You even have a choise of blue or yellow stripes on the certificate, so what are you waiting for..
Never mind these useless USPTO certs, RPTO is the wave of the future. Get them while they're hot!
.. As long as any half-*ss kid can write 'applications' for the OS by point-and-click on Visual Basic, Windows will be the OS of choise. Too many companies are making money of cutting and pasting together apps.
It isn't the OS that counts, it's the applications that run on it. If it gets the job done, nobody will give a rats ass what OS is beneath.
This is a good sign. I bet HP wouldn't do this without their lawyers being absolutely certain they have nothing to fear. Their conclusion must be the same as ours...
As much as I'd hate to see internet tax, it might be a mechanism to fight SPAM. Introducing a tax of 1 penny for each e-mail sent would set the average user back about $1 - $5 a month.
SPAM houses would pay through the nose... I thin this would be a small investment for all of us to make junk mail less profitable.
The issue isn't with aircraft stuff being more sensitive. Some stuff actually is, but that's besides to point.
The issue is safety margins. If, by any remote chance, your car stops working due to interference by you mobile phone, you pull over to the emergency lane. Well, guess what.. At 30,000 feet there ain't no emergency lane. Remember your parents telling you 'Better safe than sorry'?? In aviation land they listened to their parents real well.
.. The more they attack defenseless young kids, the more they'll alienate public opinion. Maybe, just maybe this will get it through their thick skull that their strategy is wrong.
MS Office would lock down other software from opening it's protected documents, but that doesn't prevent legitimate use of OpenOffice, or any other software. It just means that the OpenOffice group better not develop the capability to open MS proprietary formats.
In fact I'd think that if an MS Word file with DRM features set to "read allowed" can still be opened by OpenOffice, then there's no DMCA violation. Only if you try to circumvent the protection settings that are in the document.
... Not upgrading isn't an option for a lot of people. They simply get a computer either preconfigured through their IS department, or preconfigured by Dell or Gateway.
As soon as 'the boss' is unable to open your budget report written in OpenOffice, guess what he'll demand from you..
The fault is with us all, demanding more for less over and over again. The 'moron' who accepted the software most likely was told that he had to do twice the work with less then half the money this year.
Maybe it's time for everyone to realise that $399 does NOT buy you a reliable computer with a dependable OS, and that when lives are at stake, $500,000 for a custom developed system really *is* worth investing in.
As long as managers can only compare $399 to $500,000 bottom lines without being able to judge the merits of each we'll have disasters like this waiting to happen.
In this case you're wrong... NatApps sells their boxes and software licenses separately. At time of sale you decide if you want a CIFS or an NFS license for the box, or both.
Once you pay the bill, you own a box, and a non-transferrable license allowing you to turn on CIFS and/or NFS services on the box.
So yes, in the NetApps case you do have a choise not to buy a particular license. The box will not do much without at least one, but that's your choise.
We can argue over the outcome of a lawsuit forever, but the damage has long been done. It's not about a lawsuit, it's about reputation. And Linux' reputation will be tainted for a very long time to come.
Any company with an axe to grind towards Linux wants this story dragging on forever. For all we know, even IBM may be involved, as it gets a lot of media coverage over an issue that's not about their core business... You may have noticed this is all dragging on between large corporations. Their world, the world outside/., revolves around MONEY, and any way they can make it is acceptable.
Not only is this funny, but it could be a viable means of verifying the code. If you automate the process of decription without output to the screen, MD5 hash generation and comparison, (meanwhile switching off you monitor), then you might still be safe;-)
This is yet another example of our illustrious political bodies dreaming up rules and regulations from behind their desk.
Even if such a rule would become law, there is *no way* they can enforce it. I mean, if company funded orgs like the BSA can't stop copying of software, then how on earth will a publicly funded (== always short on cash) organisation do this Europe-wide? It's a paper tiger.
Slashdot Mirror
.. must be liable too. It's their damn bricks that make the roads that allow trucks with computer equipment to reach the ISP centre where, once installed, music may be travelling through.
Man, this makes me just puke...
If SCO's case ever hits the courtroom, this incident might mean that it's impossible for them to claim anyone knowingly added SCO property to the Linux kernel.
For all we know, they could have been doing it themselves...
Does the current SCO product include a file system as good as XFS? If so, what is it's name and how does it perform?
If not, why do they claim this to be SCO property but don't make their customers benefit from it? Just curious...
Rob's Pattent Trade Office will grant you any patent you like! You even have a choise of blue or yellow stripes on the certificate, so what are you waiting for..
Never mind these useless USPTO certs, RPTO is the wave of the future. Get them while they're hot!
.. As long as any half-*ss kid can write 'applications' for the OS by point-and-click on Visual Basic, Windows will be the OS of choise. Too many companies are making money of cutting and pasting together apps.
It isn't the OS that counts, it's the applications that run on it. If it gets the job done, nobody will give a rats ass what OS is beneath.
This is a good sign. I bet HP wouldn't do this without their lawyers being absolutely certain they have nothing to fear. Their conclusion must be the same as ours...
They can start being consistent. From now on you'll see ads for computers with 268.4MB RAM in stead of 256MB. So what's the big deal??
As much as I'd hate to see internet tax, it might be a mechanism to fight SPAM. Introducing a tax of 1 penny for each e-mail sent would set the average user back about $1 - $5 a month.
SPAM houses would pay through the nose... I thin this would be a small investment for all of us to make junk mail less profitable.
Something is wrong with that. See below output of my headless EPIA file/print server locked away somewhere deep and dark..
robtu@astra:~$ last reboot
wtmp begins Thu Sep 4 09:47:50 2003
robtu@astra:~$ uptime
21:12:13 up 235 days, 1:48, 1 user, load average: 0.00, 0.00, 0.00
robtu@astra:~$
The issue isn't with aircraft stuff being more sensitive. Some stuff actually is, but that's besides to point.
The issue is safety margins. If, by any remote chance, your car stops working due to interference by you mobile phone, you pull over to the emergency lane. Well, guess what.. At 30,000 feet there ain't no emergency lane. Remember your parents telling you 'Better safe than sorry'?? In aviation land they listened to their parents real well.
.. The more they attack defenseless young kids, the more they'll alienate public opinion. Maybe, just maybe this will get it through their thick skull that their strategy is wrong.
MS Office would lock down other software from opening it's protected documents, but that doesn't prevent legitimate use of OpenOffice, or any other software. It just means that the OpenOffice group better not develop the capability to open MS proprietary formats.
In fact I'd think that if an MS Word file with DRM features set to "read allowed" can still be opened by OpenOffice, then there's no DMCA violation. Only if you try to circumvent the protection settings that are in the document.
... Not upgrading isn't an option for a lot of people. They simply get a computer either preconfigured through their IS department, or preconfigured by Dell or Gateway.
As soon as 'the boss' is unable to open your budget report written in OpenOffice, guess what he'll demand from you..
They are offering to give you multiple inches every day, are they not?
The fault is with us all, demanding more for less over and over again. The 'moron' who accepted the software most likely was told that he had to do twice the work with less then half the money this year.
Maybe it's time for everyone to realise that $399 does NOT buy you a reliable computer with a dependable OS, and that when lives are at stake, $500,000 for a custom developed system really *is* worth investing in.
As long as managers can only compare $399 to $500,000 bottom lines without being able to judge the merits of each we'll have disasters like this waiting to happen.
Just replace C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM32\KERNEL32.DLL with /boot/vmlinuz-2.6.0 and you're all set.
In this case you're wrong... NatApps sells their boxes and software licenses separately. At time of sale you decide if you want a CIFS or an NFS license for the box, or both.
Once you pay the bill, you own a box, and a non-transferrable license allowing you to turn on CIFS and/or NFS services on the box.
So yes, in the NetApps case you do have a choise not to buy a particular license. The box will not do much without at least one, but that's your choise.
Well, one of them is Microsoft. They'll have yet another argument about how unreliable the use of Unix software is
Now here's a *perfect* explanation why management 'suits' are blind to real life ;-)
... if one of those rocks they drill in turns around, screems "OOUUCH!!" and hits back...
We can argue over the outcome of a lawsuit forever, but the damage has long been done. It's not about a lawsuit, it's about reputation. And Linux' reputation will be tainted for a very long time to come.
/., revolves around MONEY, and any way they can make it is acceptable.
Any company with an axe to grind towards Linux wants this story dragging on forever. For all we know, even IBM may be involved, as it gets a lot of media coverage over an issue that's not about their core business... You may have noticed this is all dragging on between large corporations. Their world, the world outside
Not only is this funny, but it could be a viable means of verifying the code. If you automate the process of decription without output to the screen, MD5 hash generation and comparison, (meanwhile switching off you monitor), then you might still be safe ;-)
Before you know it, you receive an envelope from SCO on your doorstep, as you now have seen their sources, and you might be working on Linux..
Caveat emptor!
Browsers should be designed to properly and accurately display the contents they receive.
Content should be generic and should not have to accomodate for idiosyncracies of each and every browser.
This is yet another example of our illustrious political bodies dreaming up rules and regulations from behind their desk.
Even if such a rule would become law, there is *no way* they can enforce it. I mean, if company funded orgs like the BSA can't stop copying of software, then how on earth will a publicly funded (== always short on cash) organisation do this Europe-wide? It's a paper tiger.