I'm not arguing from the GPL point of view, I'm arguing from the point of view of US Copyright Law, the Copyright holder has the right to choose who he allows to exercise his rights under Copyright, which allows for all sorts of nifty multi-licensing schemes.
The point is, that the GPL is not a contract, it's a license. License can be modified and revoked. Licenses can be applied unfairly, but contracts (in order to hold up in court) must be fair (well in that both parties must gain from the contract).
He does have absolute control over his code, he does not have absolute control over contributors code. However, if his code makes up the majority of the project, then stripping out his code to make use of the other code becomes impossible. Which extends his control over his code to the entire project.
He's the copyright holder, he can do whatever he pleases. In this case he's dual-licensed it GPL/Anti-SCO Distribution License. Further, since SCO has publically claimed that they do not agree with the GPL, they lost the privilege to distribute nmap.
From Gnu Public License:
5. You are not required to accept this License, since you have not
signed it. However, nothing else grants you permission to modify or distribute the Program or its derivative works.
Are you saying that Linus can decide on a whim to forbid the distribution of the kernel to, say Redhat?
Yes, I am. Of course, he can only forbid them to distribute code that he owns the Copyright over. So Red Hat could strip out his code and replace it, and continue distributing. Since the code he owns copyright over is a plurality of the rest of the code, it wouldn't take as long. Whereas, Fyodor (I'm assuming) owns Copyright over a majority of the nmap code.
The copyright holder (in this case Fyodor), has absolute control over the creation in question (in this case nmap), when it comes to redistribution, creation of derived works, broadcast, et cetera. Since SCO is distributing nmap, Fyodor can refuse to permit it, and revoke their distribution license. Since he has monopoly control over the code he wrote, they have no recourse.
Well, unless they can convince a judge or jury that he really intended to release it into the public domain, and therefore relinquished control over it.
1.) I'm not a ham. I am an asshole, take it as you will.
2.) If BPL stomps on federally allocated spectrum, it is the responsibility of the power company to rectify it. If they don't the FCC will generally smack them around. Further, the end user hardware will be regulated under Part 15, and as such have to receive any interference, including but not limited to federally licensed radio transmissions.
3.) Capital letters are a valid means of emphasising words, if you don't like it too bad. I don't care about grammar nazis. You are all assholes.
But the interference will prevent people from entering the field altogether. It will prevent people from being able to use their Federally Licensed Privelege to the Spectrum, and so emergency services (amongst other things) will suffer.
Unfortunately, for you, that portion of the spectrum is allocated in accordance with International Treaty, which means that Constitutionally, it has Federal Force of Law. Good luck going through Congress and getting that Repealed, especially since FEMA uses Ham Frequencies and Hams themselves.
The good news is that Ham frequencies trample back, and as a Federally licensed operator, your traffic takes precedence to theirs, and since the stuff will be regulated under Part 15, they will be responsible for all the interference. It probably won't endear you to the neighbors though.
So, in the interim when there isn't a national emergency, the hardware that amateur radio operators pay for sits idle unusable? Also, if there isn't available frequency due to interference, how do you propose that you maintain interest in Amateur Radio to maintain emergency communication?
The communication isn't usually between private citizens and emergency workers but between emergency workers and other emergency workers and emergency workers and outside agencies.
You've obviously got no clue what you're talking about troll.
You mean the same cellular phones that don't work in natural disasters? The same wind-up radios that won't get anything in a natural disaster? The back-up generators that won't do you any good when no one else can hear you in a natural disaster?
You're making the mistake of assuming that your modern day conveniences will work when the power is gone. It won't. This was shown in that massive Blackout that affected the Northeast of the US a year or so ago, remember that?
Well people who had that archaic hobby were the only communication method around when the lights were gone. You're arguing that we should interfere or do away with their spectrum because of some yokels in the backwoods who don't want broadband anyway?
Don't argue against the reliability of a guy with a morse code transmitter, it'll beat your fancy-pants cell-phone anyday.
You mean you don't know the scope of Tmp, i, and j?! What's wrong with you? Tmp is obviously a global string, i is a class level float, and j is a local pointer to a linked list. Jeez, programmers these days.
Ah, but you knowing that he had knowledge above his clearance is in turn above your clearance. Report to the nearest confession booth. Have a nice daycycle, citizen.
I use my cell phone as my primary personal phone, and telemarketing companies are not allowed to call it because it would place the call cost burden on me.
Let's see, I pay for my land-line as well as my cellular phone. By my count that means that the burden of the call is on me on both counts. Granted they take some of the burden when they call long distance, but I'm still paying for their advertisement.
Since the burden is on me, there is no Constitutional reason to "defend" their "right" to call me. I shouldn't have to pay for the privilege of not paying for someone to advertise to me.
It was put in during the Red Scare in the 1950's to differentiate us from those godless commies. If it was so easy to put it in, why are you people so opposed to removing it?
Heiroglyphics? You had it easy... in my day we had to scratch jaggedy-lines on stone, and we didn't have any of your newfangled prehistoric birds either, we had to use our fingernails, and when those ran out, we had to use our teeth. You kids these days.
Actually, since you were punching heiroglyphs, one can assume you HAD a history, so wouldn't it follow then that the bird you used wasn't prehistoric, but rather merely historic? Bah, kids these days.
That's easy, download Ted Mielczarek's Flash Click To View Plugin, it displays a button instead of the flash animation. If you click the button you see the flash animation.
Actually, it was the cost of upgrading their Exchange server that kept them from migrating to a Linux desktop. There isn't an Open Source Exchange 5.5 client, so they were forced to remain with Microsoft.
Yes, they did. When you distribute under the BSD license, only your code is under the BSD license. When you combine the two, the GPL supercedes the GPL so the entire distribution (your BSD program + GPL program foo) is distributed under the GPL license.
That means, if I so choose, I could sever the GPL parts from the BSD parts and close your software, but not the GPL parts, because I wasn't given permission to.
As a USER I am perfectly within my rights to link proprietary software that I have the right to use, with GPL software that I have the right to use. So long as I do not distribute the respective product, there is no copyright infringement.
Distributing a proprietary product that is sufficiently seperate from any possible GPL software dependencies that you can leave it up to the USER to link, is not a derived work. Because if it's that seperate, you can use something else.
Like I said, though, it sufficiently meets the letter of the license, not the spirit.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm not arguing from the GPL point of view, I'm arguing from the point of view of US Copyright Law, the Copyright holder has the right to choose who he allows to exercise his rights under Copyright, which allows for all sorts of nifty multi-licensing schemes.
The point is, that the GPL is not a contract, it's a license. License can be modified and revoked. Licenses can be applied unfairly, but contracts (in order to hold up in court) must be fair (well in that both parties must gain from the contract).
He does have absolute control over his code, he does not have absolute control over contributors code. However, if his code makes up the majority of the project, then stripping out his code to make use of the other code becomes impossible. Which extends his control over his code to the entire project.
From Gnu Public License:
Yes, I am. Of course, he can only forbid them to distribute code that he owns the Copyright over. So Red Hat could strip out his code and replace it, and continue distributing. Since the code he owns copyright over is a plurality of the rest of the code, it wouldn't take as long. Whereas, Fyodor (I'm assuming) owns Copyright over a majority of the nmap code.
The copyright holder (in this case Fyodor), has absolute control over the creation in question (in this case nmap), when it comes to redistribution, creation of derived works, broadcast, et cetera. Since SCO is distributing nmap, Fyodor can refuse to permit it, and revoke their distribution license. Since he has monopoly control over the code he wrote, they have no recourse.
Well, unless they can convince a judge or jury that he really intended to release it into the public domain, and therefore relinquished control over it.
1.) I'm not a ham. I am an asshole, take it as you will.
2.) If BPL stomps on federally allocated spectrum, it is the responsibility of the power company to rectify it. If they don't the FCC will generally smack them around. Further, the end user hardware will be regulated under Part 15, and as such have to receive any interference, including but not limited to federally licensed radio transmissions.
3.) Capital letters are a valid means of emphasising words, if you don't like it too bad. I don't care about grammar nazis. You are all assholes.
Please go kill yourself, kthx bye. ^_^
But the interference will prevent people from entering the field altogether. It will prevent people from being able to use their Federally Licensed Privelege to the Spectrum, and so emergency services (amongst other things) will suffer.
Unfortunately, for you, that portion of the spectrum is allocated in accordance with International Treaty, which means that Constitutionally, it has Federal Force of Law. Good luck going through Congress and getting that Repealed, especially since FEMA uses Ham Frequencies and Hams themselves.
The good news is that Ham frequencies trample back, and as a Federally licensed operator, your traffic takes precedence to theirs, and since the stuff will be regulated under Part 15, they will be responsible for all the interference. It probably won't endear you to the neighbors though.
So, in the interim when there isn't a national emergency, the hardware that amateur radio operators pay for sits idle unusable? Also, if there isn't available frequency due to interference, how do you propose that you maintain interest in Amateur Radio to maintain emergency communication?
The communication isn't usually between private citizens and emergency workers but between emergency workers and other emergency workers and emergency workers and outside agencies.
You've obviously got no clue what you're talking about troll.
You mean the same cellular phones that don't work in natural disasters? The same wind-up radios that won't get anything in a natural disaster? The back-up generators that won't do you any good when no one else can hear you in a natural disaster?
You're making the mistake of assuming that your modern day conveniences will work when the power is gone. It won't. This was shown in that massive Blackout that affected the Northeast of the US a year or so ago, remember that?
Well people who had that archaic hobby were the only communication method around when the lights were gone. You're arguing that we should interfere or do away with their spectrum because of some yokels in the backwoods who don't want broadband anyway?
Don't argue against the reliability of a guy with a morse code transmitter, it'll beat your fancy-pants cell-phone anyday.
You mean you don't know the scope of Tmp, i, and j?! What's wrong with you? Tmp is obviously a global string, i is a class level float, and j is a local pointer to a linked list. Jeez, programmers these days.
Blast you meddling kids and your talking dog too!
Wasting Alpha Complex resources on commies is treason. Communists are to be shot on sight, traitors are to be shot on sight.
*Zaaap*
Have a nice daycycle.
Advising the computer to report to the nearest termination booth is treason.
Ah, but you knowing that he had knowledge above his clearance is in turn above your clearance. Report to the nearest confession booth. Have a nice daycycle, citizen.
I use my cell phone as my primary personal phone, and telemarketing companies are not allowed to call it because it would place the call cost burden on me.
Let's see, I pay for my land-line as well as my cellular phone. By my count that means that the burden of the call is on me on both counts. Granted they take some of the burden when they call long distance, but I'm still paying for their advertisement.
Since the burden is on me, there is no Constitutional reason to "defend" their "right" to call me. I shouldn't have to pay for the privilege of not paying for someone to advertise to me.
It was put in during the Red Scare in the 1950's to differentiate us from those godless commies. If it was so easy to put it in, why are you people so opposed to removing it?
Heiroglyphics? You had it easy... in my day we had to scratch jaggedy-lines on stone, and we didn't have any of your newfangled prehistoric birds either, we had to use our fingernails, and when those ran out, we had to use our teeth. You kids these days.
Actually, since you were punching heiroglyphs, one can assume you HAD a history, so wouldn't it follow then that the bird you used wasn't prehistoric, but rather merely historic? Bah, kids these days.
Sorry, that was me. I was trying to find out who wins the Superbowl and what the spread was so I can go bet at my bookie.
--Joe Sixpack.
That's easy, download Ted Mielczarek's Flash Click To View Plugin, it displays a button instead of the flash animation. If you click the button you see the flash animation.
Actually, it was the cost of upgrading their Exchange server that kept them from migrating to a Linux desktop. There isn't an Open Source Exchange 5.5 client, so they were forced to remain with Microsoft.
We don't need a flag, we live here. Millions of us, we've got culture and civilization.
Yes, they did. When you distribute under the BSD license, only your code is under the BSD license. When you combine the two, the GPL supercedes the GPL so the entire distribution (your BSD program + GPL program foo) is distributed under the GPL license.
That means, if I so choose, I could sever the GPL parts from the BSD parts and close your software, but not the GPL parts, because I wasn't given permission to.
As a USER I am perfectly within my rights to link proprietary software that I have the right to use, with GPL software that I have the right to use. So long as I do not distribute the respective product, there is no copyright infringement.
Distributing a proprietary product that is sufficiently seperate from any possible GPL software dependencies that you can leave it up to the USER to link, is not a derived work. Because if it's that seperate, you can use something else.
Like I said, though, it sufficiently meets the letter of the license, not the spirit.