I've recently noticed that Sainsbury's don't offer the same deals on their website as they do instore (they have a very large store near me).
E.g. They have an amazing array of bottled beers in store, with some good deals such as Greene King IPA 660ml bottles at ~2.40/litre. The selection on their website however is quite limited with no decent beer at less than 3 pounds per litre.
Tesco's do offer GK IPA on their website at 2.37/litre, but don't have free delivery deals like Sainsbury's.
If you use this tool, you may not be committing copyright infringement.
Not only using it, we're talking about the legality of distributing this program. People need to understand how fundamental this is, and stop saying idiotic things like "it's the nicest DRM around, so it doesn't seem right to break it".
It comes down to whether we have the right to distribute software that we have created (from scratch).
Look at the NO 1's and look at the best product and they are not the same. To get to the top lawsuits, strong arming and many more things are used.
Except in the case of web servers:-)
Re:QT's licence is BAD!
on
A Taste of Qt 4
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
All the morons are out this morning...
> QT isn't even free software
The GPL'ed version is. GPL'ed Qt != Win32 Qt, i.e. you need to view them as different products.
Trolltech have given us GPL'ed Qt, but they have absolutely no obligation to provide their Win32 version under the same license.
The price is a factor only if you want to develop using Trolltech's proprietary version. I suppose that if you can't afford that then you may have to consider cheaper alternatives, but this doesn't lead us to "QT's licence is BAD!" unless you see all proprietary licenses as bad (I do, but you seem to be singling out this one).
I don't see Qt as a competing technology to Java, but I love using the Free Qt, and appreciate Trolltech's generosity in providing it.
> So anyone using PlayFair to overcome the DRMs is essentially in breach of contract.
So what? I have no contract with Apple because I haven't used the iTMS. I also am not infringing the copyrights on any of their content.
I simply do not want to see companies deciding whether particular pieces of software (not their's) can be distributed.
I can't believe the number of sanctimonious comments around here that suggest that the existance of this program is wrong. Why is it? (given that, as the same people point out, the DRM doesn't stop potential infringments anyway).
> How is violating the itunes licence... different from voilating the GPL?
Here's how: The GPL is a copyright license, i.e. covering redistribution. You seem to be suggesting that the "itunes license" attempts to cover usage of your (purchased) copy of a piece of music. This is clearly in contradiction to any notion of fair use.
I'm not a iTMS customer, but I care about this program.
It's the thin end of the wedge, and we need to be reacting to these DMCA takedowns. I don't see any reason for someone to be unable to choose to distribute the source code to any program that they have created. I want to protect this idea as a fundamental principle because otherwise more companies or "industry groups" will erode it and attack other free software projects.
We shouldn't be in a position where people are talking about whether ${SOME_COMPANY} will permit us to distribute our programs.
To clarify, I meant: what does Gentoo do when, for example, two programs use the same library but use features that are exclusive to different versions of that library?
You can still get Framemaker for linux. Check google for "fmlinux2.tar.gz". You may also need the information in this post (unless the hack has already been applied).
If you read some of Bill Thompson's back catalogue, it seems that the man is obsessed with regulation as a cure-all solution (see here, here, or here).
It is a widely-held British viewpoint. Whenever there is some new perceived problem with the internet (a global network), politicans here start publicly calling for new government regulations. They know how pointless it is but want to be seen aligning themselves with the popular stance.
Unfortunately the link to supported servers on that page suggests that *no* servers are currently useable.
It would be nice to use standard protocols: IMAP/LDAP/iCalendar, but I think that the server components must be integrated. For example, Exchange stores one copy of an attachment that users send around and in places I've seen where email is the way they give each other multi-megabyte files this is a vital feature.
Writing a new event handler is as simple as overriding a method and then connecting it to your widget -- simple as that.
This is also simple using the Swing API (in Java). You can just make an anonymous inner class by overriding a standard adapter class provided by the API. For example (from Sun's Java Tutorial):
You say they stripped information. That's not a GPL violation.
I've also seen the notice on your site before and thought you seemed reasonable. It is hard to believe that you could post something so stupid. What about this crucial part of the GPL:
1. You may copy and distribute verbatim copies of the Program's source code as you receive it, in any medium, provided that you conspicuously and appropriately publish on each copy an appropriate copyright notice and disclaimer of warranty; keep intact all the notices that refer to this License and to the absence of any warranty; and give any other recipients of the Program a copy of this License along with the Program.
It is so obviously not OK to just distribute Java bytecode. Get a clue!
I find it surprising that more businesses aren't aware of the benefits of switching to Linux desktops that are X thin clients. I use an LTSP-style setup at home and it really works well. There aren't low-cost clients available in the shops though, so I have to make my own using VIA mini-ITX kit for about 150ukp (~$250). With the commoditisation of gigabit networking and 64-bit machines (i.e. Opteron), it must be fairly easy for one server to support more than 40 desktops.
I built the machine myself (very quickly because there is only the motherboard, ram and case) with parts from ultim8pc (in the UK).
I've been using LTSP, and did use nasd which spluttered alot if the application wasn't directly using it (notably my artsd isn't compiled with nasd output support - on Mandrake). The nasd doesn't start anymore since I set the terminal to use a Linux 2.6 kernel (an attempt to get a USB mouse to work - although I now think that problem is VIA's fault) and neither does the telnet server, so to get a command prompt I have to reboot with the terminal set to runlevel 3 (and even then if I manually start nasd it just silently fails).
I expect that next time I upgrade my server OS I might use Mandrake's support for thin clients which also has the advantage of making it easy to run any server app locally (e.g. mplayer).
Slashdot Mirror
I've recently noticed that Sainsbury's don't offer the same deals on their website as they do instore (they have a very large store near me).
E.g. They have an amazing array of bottled beers in store, with some good deals such as Greene King IPA 660ml bottles at ~2.40/litre. The selection on their website however is quite limited with no decent beer at less than 3 pounds per litre.
Tesco's do offer GK IPA on their website at 2.37/litre, but don't have free delivery deals like Sainsbury's.
- Brian
You are perfectly entitled to distribute your software, and Apple is entitled to change its DRM scheme.
What we are discussing is the idea that you are *not* entitled to distribute your software, because Apple's use of the DMCA makes that illegal.
Why don't you read a little more before ignorantly saying "Don't be so dumb"?
It is a big grey area, but how about virus creators? Should they be able to distribute their software?
Yes, I think that fundamentally they do have a right to distribute their software (which is different from releasing it into a system to attack).
How about if I released some software that was somehow able to obtain your personal information?
I don't see how would you publishing the source to that be wrong. In this case only the misuse of the software is wrong.
you can't expect Apple/RIAA to sit around while people distribute software that circumvents their copyright protections.
Well, I do. Because, as with your other examples, there is no reason for the free speech of the creator of the software to be overridden.
- Brian
If you use this tool, you may not be committing copyright infringement.
Not only using it, we're talking about the legality of distributing this program. People need to understand how fundamental this is, and stop saying idiotic things like "it's the nicest DRM around, so it doesn't seem right to break it".
It comes down to whether we have the right to distribute software that we have created (from scratch).
- Brian.
with FSF India providing legal support. How will Apple respond?
The registered address of the hymn-project.org domain is in India, but for its "A" record I currently get the following:
OrgName: United Layer, Inc.
OrgID: LAER
Address: 1019 Mission Street
City: San Francisco
StateProv: CA
PostalCode: 94103
Country: US
So perhaps there remains a danger that Apple will simply DMCA this place as per usual.
- Brian.
Look at the NO 1's and look at the best product and they are not the same. To get to the top lawsuits, strong arming and many more things are used.
:-)
Except in the case of web servers
All the morons are out this morning...
> QT isn't even free software
The GPL'ed version is. GPL'ed Qt != Win32 Qt, i.e. you need to view them as different products.
Trolltech have given us GPL'ed Qt, but they have absolutely no obligation to provide their Win32 version under the same license.
The price is a factor only if you want to develop using Trolltech's proprietary version. I suppose that if you can't afford that then you may have to consider cheaper alternatives, but this doesn't lead us to "QT's licence is BAD!" unless you see all proprietary licenses as bad (I do, but you seem to be singling out this one).
I don't see Qt as a competing technology to Java, but I love using the Free Qt, and appreciate Trolltech's generosity in providing it.
- Brian.
> So anyone using PlayFair to overcome the DRMs is essentially in breach of contract.
So what? I have no contract with Apple because I haven't used the iTMS. I also am not infringing the copyrights on any of their content.
I simply do not want to see companies deciding whether particular pieces of software (not their's) can be distributed.
I can't believe the number of sanctimonious comments around here that suggest that the existance of this program is wrong. Why is it? (given that, as the same people point out, the DRM doesn't stop potential infringments anyway).
- Brian.
> Are you suggesting ... that it's now perfectly OK for me to come by when you're not home, pick the lock, and take what doesn't belong to me?
No he wasn't. Please re-examine his post. He did not say he thought copyright infringement was okay.
Anti DRM != Pro Copyright Infringement
- Brian.
> How is violating the itunes licence ... different from voilating the GPL?
Here's how: The GPL is a copyright license, i.e. covering redistribution.
You seem to be suggesting that the "itunes license" attempts to cover usage of your (purchased) copy of a piece of music. This is clearly in contradiction to any notion of fair use.
- Brian.
> I could care less about this program.
I'm not a iTMS customer, but I care about this program.
It's the thin end of the wedge, and we need to be reacting to these DMCA takedowns. I don't see any reason for someone to be unable to choose to distribute the source code to any program that they have created. I want to protect this idea as a fundamental principle because otherwise more companies or "industry groups" will erode it and attack other free software projects.
We shouldn't be in a position where people are talking about whether ${SOME_COMPANY} will permit us to distribute our programs.
- Brian
> Apple put in the LEAST DRM it could get away with.
This is a popular idea around here of late. What does it mean? Presumably "get away with" in order to be acceptable to the RIAA.
Well it's not acceptable to me, so it is still more DRM than they can get away with (and have me as a customer).
- Brian.
To clarify, I meant: what does Gentoo do when, for example, two programs use the same library but use features that are exclusive to different versions of that library?
- Brian.
Something I've been wondering about Gentoo is: How does it cope with several source packages having different dependencies?
Thanks
- Brian.
You can still get Framemaker for linux. Check google for "fmlinux2.tar.gz".
You may also need the information in this post (unless the hack has already been applied).
- Brian.
> American liberalism has proven a bad strategy for fighting poverty.
:-?
Is this new form of liberalism a Bush strategy
"You keep saying that word, I do not think it means what you think it means." - Inigo Montoya
I really think that we'd be better off if journalists were regulated by the government.
If you read some of Bill Thompson's back catalogue, it seems that the man is obsessed with regulation as a cure-all solution (see here, here, or here).
It is a widely-held British viewpoint. Whenever there is some new perceived problem with the internet (a global network), politicans here start publicly calling for new government regulations. They know how pointless it is but want to be seen aligning themselves with the popular stance.
- Brian.
Unfortunately the link to supported servers on that page suggests that *no* servers are currently useable.
It would be nice to use standard protocols: IMAP/LDAP/iCalendar, but I think that the server components must be integrated. For example, Exchange stores one copy of an attachment that users send around and in places I've seen where email is the way they give each other multi-megabyte files this is a vital feature.
- Brian Blessed.
This is also simple using the Swing API (in Java). You can just make an anonymous inner class by overriding a standard adapter class provided by the API. For example (from Sun's Java Tutorial):
- Brian
if you do develop code with Qt using the GPL version, as I understand it, there are issues should you then choose to make it a commercial application.
This is nonsense. I think you're confusing the GPL'ed X11 Qt with the non-comercial version of Qt for MS-Windows.
GPL'ed software cannot have a limitation such as being non-comercial imposed upon it.
- Brian
I've also seen the notice on your site before and thought you seemed reasonable. It is hard to believe that you could post something so stupid. What about this crucial part of the GPL:
It is so obviously not OK to just distribute Java bytecode. Get a clue!
- Brian
I find it surprising that more businesses aren't aware of the benefits of switching to Linux desktops that are X thin clients. I use an LTSP-style setup at home and it really works well. There aren't low-cost clients available in the shops though, so I have to make my own using VIA mini-ITX kit for about 150ukp (~$250).
With the commoditisation of gigabit networking and 64-bit machines (i.e. Opteron), it must be fairly easy for one server to support more than 40 desktops.
- Brain.
This story seems to be about contributions made to the defense fund already discussed here in November.
- Brian
I built the machine myself (very quickly because there is only the motherboard, ram and case) with parts from ultim8pc (in the UK).
I've been using LTSP, and did use nasd which spluttered alot if the application wasn't directly using it (notably my artsd isn't compiled with nasd output support - on Mandrake). The nasd doesn't start anymore since I set the terminal to use a Linux 2.6 kernel (an attempt to get a USB mouse to work - although I now think that problem is VIA's fault) and neither does the telnet server, so to get a command prompt I have to reboot with the terminal set to runlevel 3 (and even then if I manually start nasd it just silently fails).
I expect that next time I upgrade my server OS I might use Mandrake's support for thin clients which also has the advantage of making it easy to run any server app locally (e.g. mplayer).
- Brian