You could write you code in notepad, and then compile it with C++Builder. Anyway, I don't see why borland could ever put any restrictions on code you write yourself, no matter what program windows send the WM_CHAR messages to (or whatever in linux).
I didn't read the artical, but I'm surprized that people thought that code they wrote could be owned by anyone else.
But I have to say I'm disappointed the AP is not pursueing the guys who made that Elian parody. No matter how much it sucks, copyright law is a reality
Copyright law also protects the right to make parodys. So, whats your point?
I'm not saying that Copying is right, only that the required chances to our society to stop it are not worth it.
And it is not fucking steeling. If I copy something, no one is deprived of anything other then the reduction in chances that I might pay for it. If I wasn't going to buy it anyway, the creator looses nothing.
When you violate copyrights, you are charged with copyright violation, not theft. And there is a reason for that.
Too bad your definition of theft won't hold up in court.
Um, if I got caught copying information, I would be charged with copyright violation, not theft. Because I copied something copyrighted. The root of the word is copy for a reason. If the courts agreed with you, they would call it theft. But they don't.
I'm not saying that copying isn't wrong (at least, I'm not saying that here), only that it isn't the same thing as 'theft' and calling it that is only a pathetic attempt to use the transfer the connotation of 'theft' to 'copy'.
If people were copying my work, personally, I'd be happy that people were enjoying my art. I don't believe that I would ever starve to death because of it.
Ug, I've had some bad experiences with Real player. Back in the day, you could use MS Media player to view RMs, but certain formats didn't work. When I downloaded real player, they worked again, in Media player.
Except Real associates like every media format out there to itself.
So I removed the keys from the registry. And real put them back. Real also sets it self up to run when you boot the computer. You can change this in the windows registry, but then any time you try to view a real media file (Media player won't do it any more) it resets itself to start up on boot. And it takes forever to load. Its like ICQ with better graphic art!
Really, what these guys are doing is no better then the l4m3r skr1p7 k11dy and his Trojan horse. I can't believe they get away with this kind of behavior. And I can't believe that people still choose to encode their files in bogus proprietary formats like RM and QuickTime.
At least that the people are in violation of copyright law, but according to the DMCA, Napster is OK. It will depend on the output of the judge thoug
In any event, What the law says really makes no diffrence as to wether or not something is wrong or right. I would hardly think you'd find many people who said that Jim Crow laws were valid.
Sharing and Stealing are independent things. I can steal something, and share it, or I can share something I didn't steal. I hope I'm not being to complex for you there Rombuu.
Anyway, copying is not stealing because the person copied from is deprived of nothing. It's copying, and whether its wrong or right, it should be called that. Nothing is more pathetic then trying to win an argument by using loaded terms.
Why do you people think this lawyer is so great, better then other lawyers? He's saying those things because he's being paid to say them by andover, secondly, he's not that intelligent.
How can Microsoft claim proprietary protections for enhancement to an open standard protocol?
Kerberos has built in expansions slots for vendors to use, if I'm not mistaken.
2. How can Microsoft use the Kerberos name, which signifies an open standard protocol, in connection with a proprietary protocol?
Kerberos, with expansion slots filled is still Kerberos. (that is, its still compatible) I don't see why they couldn't call it that. Perhaps the author of Kerberos should have trademarked it (did he). Then he could sue MS like Sun did over java.
How can Microsoft claim trade secrecy for a protocol that is distributed over the Internet?
Is he talking about MS's extensions, or Kerberos itself? I don't think MS is claiming Trade Secret status for the whole thing. If the guy is talking about M$ Extensions, then he has a point, but why didn't he say Extensions? (And, Microsoft obviously believes that Click-Wrap license 'agreements' are legally binding.) The only reason for that ambiguity is ignorance
What are you talking about? the guy just asked a few questions, Microsoft doesn't need to respond at all. There clean on taking them to court now In fact, they didn't even have to send a letter.
Lawyers suck. Except this one.
Again, WTF? This guy is being paid to fight on your side. If MS paid him, he'd probably say the same thing the other one did. I'm sure if you worked for M$ you would think he sucked anyway? I mean look at questions #1 and #2? Kerberos has extensibility for vendor stuff, and that's what MS did (it probably wasn't intended to be used like this, but it's still 'kerberos')
Just because a person was paid to agree with you, doesn't mean that he's any better then the average lawyer (I'm not saying he isn't, just that we don't know if he is)
Slashdot Mirror
OOP is cool, but it sounds stupid, when you say it.
Another achronim, like URL, that should not be pronounced....
You could write you code in notepad, and then compile it with C++Builder. Anyway, I don't see why borland could ever put any restrictions on code you write yourself, no matter what program windows send the WM_CHAR messages to (or whatever in linux).
I didn't read the artical, but I'm surprized that people thought that code they wrote could be owned by anyone else.
But I have to say I'm disappointed the AP is not pursueing the guys who made that Elian parody. No matter how much it sucks, copyright law is a reality
Copyright law also protects the right to make parodys. So, whats your point?
beacuse its worth something to me.
I'm not saying that Copying is right, only that the required chances to our society to stop it are not worth it.
And it is not fucking steeling. If I copy something, no one is deprived of anything other then the reduction in chances that I might pay for it. If I wasn't going to buy it anyway, the creator looses nothing.
When you violate copyrights, you are charged with copyright violation, not theft. And there is a reason for that.
Too bad your definition of theft won't hold up in court.
Um, if I got caught copying information, I would be charged with copyright violation, not theft. Because I copied something copyrighted. The root of the word is copy for a reason. If the courts agreed with you, they would call it theft. But they don't.
I'm not saying that copying isn't wrong (at least, I'm not saying that here), only that it isn't the same thing as 'theft' and calling it that is only a pathetic attempt to use the transfer the connotation of 'theft' to 'copy'.
If people were copying my work, personally, I'd be happy that people were enjoying my art. I don't believe that I would ever starve to death because of it.
Ug, I've had some bad experiences with Real player. Back in the day, you could use MS Media player to view RMs, but certain formats didn't work. When I downloaded real player, they worked again, in Media player.
Except Real associates like every media format out there to itself.
So I removed the keys from the registry. And real put them back. Real also sets it self up to run when you boot the computer. You can change this in the windows registry, but then any time you try to view a real media file (Media player won't do it any more) it resets itself to start up on boot. And it takes forever to load. Its like ICQ with better graphic art!
Really, what these guys are doing is no better then the l4m3r skr1p7 k11dy and his Trojan horse. I can't believe they get away with this kind of behavior. And I can't believe that people still choose to encode their files in bogus proprietary formats like RM and QuickTime.
but where's the fun in that?
The 'central server', or even a chain of them could be dynamicaly assigned from the pool of boxes running the software.
They may be legaly right.
At least that the people are in violation of copyright law, but according to the DMCA, Napster is OK. It will depend on the output of the judge thoug
In any event, What the law says really makes no diffrence as to wether or not something is wrong or right. I would hardly think you'd find many people who said that Jim Crow laws were valid.
Theft is theft. Deal with it.
And coping is coping. Not Theft. Deal with it
Why don't you look up the definition of the word. If you are deprived of nothing, nothing has been stolen.
That was an interesting artical, I might check out #gnutelladev sometime.
But I really wish that people would learn the diffrence between the internet and the web. They are two diffrent things.
Just use "dd" to append a single bit to the end of the mp3. The MD5 sum will still be completely different.
Hrm... probably beacuse most file systems cut on the byte boundery
, Dr Dre -> Dr Dray
md5 sums of the non-id data?
I'm sure you can dick with the audio data though...
that is until they make napster clients that filp a random bit in the id3 tag.
Uh, they could just md5 the audio data only....
wohoo! that artical had a great quote, I think I'm going to start using it my sig :)
"In five years there will be software available to download movies."
Sharing and Stealing are independent things. I can steal something, and share it, or I can share something I didn't steal. I hope I'm not being to complex for you there Rombuu.
Anyway, copying is not stealing because the person copied from is deprived of nothing. It's copying, and whether its wrong or right, it should be called that. Nothing is more pathetic then trying to win an argument by using loaded terms.
Why do you people think this lawyer is so great, better then other lawyers? He's saying those things because he's being paid to say them by andover, secondly, he's not that intelligent.
How can Microsoft claim proprietary protections for enhancement to an open standard protocol?
Kerberos has built in expansions slots for vendors to use, if I'm not mistaken.
2. How can Microsoft use the Kerberos name, which signifies an open standard protocol, in connection with a proprietary protocol?
Kerberos, with expansion slots filled is still Kerberos. (that is, its still compatible) I don't see why they couldn't call it that. Perhaps the author of Kerberos should have trademarked it (did he). Then he could sue MS like Sun did over java.
How can Microsoft claim trade secrecy for a protocol that is distributed over the Internet?
Is he talking about MS's extensions, or Kerberos itself? I don't think MS is claiming Trade Secret status for the whole thing. If the guy is talking about M$ Extensions, then he has a point, but why didn't he say Extensions? (And, Microsoft obviously believes that Click-Wrap license 'agreements' are legally binding.) The only reason for that ambiguity is ignorance
He's raking 'em over the coals.
What are you talking about? the guy just asked a few questions, Microsoft doesn't need to respond at all. There clean on taking them to court now In fact, they didn't even have to send a letter.
Lawyers suck. Except this one.
Again, WTF? This guy is being paid to fight on your side. If MS paid him, he'd probably say the same thing the other one did. I'm sure if you worked for M$ you would think he sucked anyway? I mean look at questions #1 and #2? Kerberos has extensibility for vendor stuff, and that's what MS did (it probably wasn't intended to be used like this, but it's still 'kerberos')
Just because a person was paid to agree with you, doesn't mean that he's any better then the average lawyer (I'm not saying he isn't, just that we don't know if he is)
and it was still painfull...
dude these guys are pay a million dolars a year for there physical space, I'm sure they could afford Oracle
My monitor is off for repairs and I'm using a loaner, one that runs mostly at 640x480. and there stupid popup window won't even fit on my page.
Oh well, there adds were cool, but, the name... 'boo.com'??
It looks like the guy is trying to got back down to a hundred, not the other way around. I may be mistaken, though.
How could you compile an emulator for ia-64 with a compiler for ia-64? The resulting emulator would only work on ia-64 chips...
[see subject]