One person who seems to be involved with a lot of these cases is Erik Andersen. He is in a unique position where he is the copyright owner of one of the pieces of code that keeps getting used by vendors (busybox), and his father is lawyer.
He can politely contact companies as a copyright owner, and he has a lawyer to back him up if they do not comply.
I'm not sure if anyone else noticed this, but that does not appear to be a stock 2.4.5 kernel. I ran a diff, and it came up as 14MB. Perhaps something interesting has been added?
(Note that I'm not too familiar with recursive diffs, so it's possible I did something wrong)
That was exactly my thought. I wonder what sort of checking they do to make sure that the request came from a real law enforcement officer.
I'm tempted to send them a fax as a "law enforcement officer" requesting my personal information, and see if they provide it no questions acted.
Of course, I'm not sure how seriously that would be taken if they were to catch on. Would they persue a case of impersonating an officer if all I was obtaining was my own information that I already have access to?
You can download them free at messenger.msn.com or apple.com/ichat, respectively, as part of a public beta test - a software company's way of saying, "Sure they're buggy, but what do you want for free?"
Tivo would be great if it didn't require on-going charges (and doesn't allow anyone to screw around with the installed software).
If you don't want monthly charges, you can get a lifetime subscription. It's a bit expensive, but it increases the value of the Tivo if you were to resell it.
Throwing a DVD burner into the mix is a great step-up, but only if there is some way to edit the program before burning it..
Right now you have no way of legally getting the movie off of the Tivo (besides playing it to a video capture card). With this you can record to a DVD-RW. It should be easy enough to move it onto your computer, and burn a DVD-R once you edit it.
Just think of the DVD-R/RW as a method for getting it off the tivo for your editing.
Sure editing software on the tivo would be easier, but this is better than what was previously available.
Well, they do owe you what they build on top of your work, but that's it.
Actually, they don't. They only need to redistribute changes if they distribute the binaries at all. In house usage doesn't require the code be released at all.
If you do redistribute the binaries, you only need to distribute the code changes to the people who recieve your binaries.
It really depends on what he sues them for. Depending on what their contract with his company was, this could just be a simple breach of contract issue.
I know that my contract currently doesn't allow me to try recruiting my co-workers if I was to leave. Perhaps leaving together violated something similiar.
You may still have the ability to use the distribution, but you won't recieve any future updates to it. You should still be able to get the source for future updates, but they restrict access to their binaries, which undergo quite a bit of testing.
I'm not allowed? Assuming on the other servers for which I have no service agreement I install only the Free software packages from RHAS, Red Hat can't tell me I'm not allowed to do that.
When you sign up for the service contract with Redhat, the contract states that you will not install their binaries on servers you do not have service contracts on.
While the GPL allows you to install on as many systems as you'd like, you'll be in breach of that service contract, and you lose service on the machines you had purchased service constracts for.
The problem isn't with "5 other RH servers", it's with 5 other server running RH Advanced Server that aren't covered by the service contract.
You can have as many machines as you want running other Redhat versions, but you aren't allowed to install RHAS on more machines than you have service contracts for.
http://www.redhat.com/licenses/rhlas_us.html
"If Customer wishes to increase the number of Installed Servers, then Customer will purchase from Red Hat additional Services for each additional Installed Server."
Earlier they defined "installed server" as "the number of servers on which Customer installs Red Hat Linux Advanced Server"
Even though ext3 is a journaling filesystem, it still does a lengthy (and annoying) filesystem check every 20 mounts or so. To its credit it has never found an error, but still. I thought getting rid of that stuff was why we wanted journaling filesystems.
I personally think that the occasional check is probably a good idea, but if it annoys you then you can always change the interval, or even disable it.
Just use "tune2fs -c <how many mounts>/dev/PARTITIONNAME"
-c 0 should cause it to not use that functionality.
First there is the question about if Waste is GPL'ed or not. If it turns out he didn't own the code, then he didn't have the right to GPL the code in the first place. If it is decided that Waste IS GPLed, then he can happily continue work on it and release his own version, but it cannot be copyrighted under his name since the original code is owned by AOL.
"If it makes the games and applications faster, great."
In that case, I would suggest running them at a lower resolution with less colors. They games should run great then.
I think that optimizing drivers to speed up popular games is fine.. as long as you're pushing the hardware to it's limits to increase speed, and not just sacrificing quality.
They're talking about reducing the quality of the graphics to speed them up. I wouldn't consider that a good thing, no matter what.
This months issue of a US linux magazine (Probably "Linux Magazine", but I'd need to go home to check) has a pretty favorable review of SCO Linux in it.
The problem is that magazines are put together quite a while before they actually are released, so the information in them can be out of date by the time people actually see it.
The May issue of a magazine usually comes out in April. It probably goes to the printers 6 weeks before being released, so that would put the magazine being created in each March, before the lawsuit.
I've found no compelling reason to upgrade past my Voodoo 3 and TNT1, so I haven't. And I don't forsee doing so any time soon. Or perhaps ever.
It really depends on what you do with your machine. For most purposes an upgrade isn't required. But if you ever want to be able to play Doom 3 when it comes out, then your Voodoo 3 or TNT1 won't hack it.
I personally don't play too many 3D intensive games, so I don't care much. I just upgraded my original Radeon to a Radeon 7500, but that was because of problems with the original card rather than wanting something better.
Only the actual owner of the code has the ability relicense it. Employees of a company generally do not own the code that they write (and especially code that was not written by them) unless it's specifically stated in their contract. I doubt a contract at MS allows that.
Since they don't own the code, they don't have the ability to relicense the code under the GPL.
Slashdot Mirror
Nobody has seen this comparison but Darl McBride and his evil twin brother.
Is that his other brother Darl?
These days you can buy a computer for not much more than the price of Windows XP home (retail version).
They're not great machines, but they're better than a PII 266mhz.
Or as other people said, ditch windows entirely.
One person who seems to be involved with a lot of these cases is Erik Andersen. He is in a unique position where he is the copyright owner of one of the pieces of code that keeps getting used by vendors (busybox), and his father is lawyer.
He can politely contact companies as a copyright owner, and he has a lawyer to back him up if they do not comply.
Well, if they did sue heirs then that would cut down on the number of new lawsuits for newly born people they would need to deal with.
Unless of course they're going to sue people for their infringements on top of their parents.
There is gtk+ for windows. It's used by both Gimp for windows and gaim for windows.
I'm not sure if anyone else noticed this, but that does not appear to be a stock 2.4.5 kernel. I ran a diff, and it came up as 14MB. Perhaps something interesting has been added?
(Note that I'm not too familiar with recursive diffs, so it's possible I did something wrong)
provide it no questions acted.
I of course meant "asked" here. Next time I'll have to preview.
That was exactly my thought. I wonder what sort of checking they do to make sure that the request came from a real law enforcement officer.
I'm tempted to send them a fax as a "law enforcement officer" requesting my personal information, and see if they provide it no questions acted.
Of course, I'm not sure how seriously that would be taken if they were to catch on. Would they persue a case of impersonating an officer if all I was obtaining was my own information that I already have access to?
Beta or not, they're outright saying that you can't expect much for free. That goes against the entire Free Software movement.
You can download them free at messenger.msn.com or apple.com/ichat, respectively, as part of a public beta test - a software company's way of saying, "Sure they're buggy, but what do you want for free?"
I believe I hear the sounds of a pissed off Gnu.
Tivo would be great if it didn't require on-going charges (and doesn't allow anyone to screw around with the installed software).
If you don't want monthly charges, you can get a lifetime subscription. It's a bit expensive, but it increases the value of the Tivo if you were to resell it.
Throwing a DVD burner into the mix is a great step-up, but only if there is some way to edit the program before burning it..
Right now you have no way of legally getting the movie off of the Tivo (besides playing it to a video capture card). With this you can record to a DVD-RW. It should be easy enough to move it onto your computer, and burn a DVD-R once you edit it.
Just think of the DVD-R/RW as a method for getting it off the tivo for your editing.
Sure editing software on the tivo would be easier, but this is better than what was previously available.
Well, they do owe you what they build on top of your work, but that's it.
Actually, they don't. They only need to redistribute changes if they distribute the binaries at all. In house usage doesn't require the code be released at all.
If you do redistribute the binaries, you only need to distribute the code changes to the people who recieve your binaries.
At that point, I think the watch would begin to grow hair. ;)
It really depends on what he sues them for. Depending on what their contract with his company was, this could just be a simple breach of contract issue.
I know that my contract currently doesn't allow me to try recruiting my co-workers if I was to leave. Perhaps leaving together violated something similiar.
You may still have the ability to use the distribution, but you won't recieve any future updates to it. You should still be able to get the source for future updates, but they restrict access to their binaries, which undergo quite a bit of testing.
I'm not allowed? Assuming on the other servers for which I have no service agreement I install only the Free software packages from RHAS, Red Hat can't tell me I'm not allowed to do that.
When you sign up for the service contract with Redhat, the contract states that you will not install their binaries on servers you do not have service contracts on.
While the GPL allows you to install on as many systems as you'd like, you'll be in breach of that service contract, and you lose service on the machines you had purchased service constracts for.
The problem isn't with "5 other RH servers", it's with 5 other server running RH Advanced Server that aren't covered by the service contract.
You can have as many machines as you want running other Redhat versions, but you aren't allowed to install RHAS on more machines than you have service contracts for.
http://www.redhat.com/licenses/rhlas_us.html
"If Customer wishes to increase the number of Installed Servers, then Customer will purchase from Red Hat additional Services for each additional Installed Server."
Earlier they defined "installed server" as "the number of servers on which Customer installs Red Hat Linux Advanced Server"
Even though ext3 is a journaling filesystem, it still does a lengthy (and annoying) filesystem check every 20 mounts or so. To its credit it has never found an error, but still. I thought getting rid of that stuff was why we wanted journaling filesystems.
/dev/PARTITIONNAME"
I personally think that the occasional check is probably a good idea, but if it annoys you then you can always change the interval, or even disable it.
Just use "tune2fs -c <how many mounts>
-c 0 should cause it to not use that functionality.
While the porn industry seems less hell-bent on suing everyone in sight, I'm guessing that most porn movies/photos are under copywrite.
Did you read the review?
The feature you seem to be looking for isn't supported. There is no automatic buffering.
I'd suggest waiting for the next version before hunting for that best price.
No, he can't.
First there is the question about if Waste is GPL'ed or not. If it turns out he didn't own the code, then he didn't have the right to GPL the code in the first place. If it is decided that Waste IS GPLed, then he can happily continue work on it and release his own version, but it cannot be copyrighted under his name since the original code is owned by AOL.
At least that's my non-lawyer understanding.
"If it makes the games and applications faster, great."
In that case, I would suggest running them at a lower resolution with less colors. They games should run great then.
I think that optimizing drivers to speed up popular games is fine.. as long as you're pushing the hardware to it's limits to increase speed, and not just sacrificing quality.
They're talking about reducing the quality of the graphics to speed them up. I wouldn't consider that a good thing, no matter what.
This months issue of a US linux magazine (Probably "Linux Magazine", but I'd need to go home to check) has a pretty favorable review of SCO Linux in it.
The problem is that magazines are put together quite a while before they actually are released, so the information in them can be out of date by the time people actually see it.
The May issue of a magazine usually comes out in April. It probably goes to the printers 6 weeks before being released, so that would put the magazine being created in each March, before the lawsuit.
I've found no compelling reason to upgrade past my Voodoo 3 and TNT1, so I haven't. And I don't forsee doing so any time soon. Or perhaps ever.
It really depends on what you do with your machine. For most purposes an upgrade isn't required. But if you ever want to be able to play Doom 3 when it comes out, then your Voodoo 3 or TNT1 won't hack it.
I personally don't play too many 3D intensive games, so I don't care much. I just upgraded my original Radeon to a Radeon 7500, but that was because of problems with the original card rather than wanting something better.
Only the actual owner of the code has the ability relicense it. Employees of a company generally do not own the code that they write (and especially code that was not written by them) unless it's specifically stated in their contract. I doubt a contract at MS allows that.
Since they don't own the code, they don't have the ability to relicense the code under the GPL.