Re:What can we do to stop this from happening agai
on
Mandrake Shakeup
·
· Score: 1
Do Volvo and Toyota give their blueprints away?
How come people think business secrets are something exclusive to software?
IP is a huge part of ANY business.
Re:What can we do to stop this from happening agai
on
Mandrake Shakeup
·
· Score: 1
They all get much work done by volunteers for free. Free labour.
If you split the total income from free software on all the people developing it you will find that there is _no way_ people can live on it.
What kind of solution is that? Most programmers should give their work away for free so that others with strong trademarks can sell it instead (call it support if you think that's more fun).
Re:What can we do to stop this from happening agai
on
Mandrake Shakeup
·
· Score: 1
Business is built on ownership in different forms like property, trading, trademarks and patents.
The GPL is aimed at removing ownership (read, "why software should not have owners" on the GNU homepage if you haven't got that), of cause it hurts businesses! That's its core goal! You, who suggest it doesn't, listen to yourself for Christ sake!
However, it doesn't hurt business as much as it hurts programmers. Programmers should _give_ their work away for free.
Don't suggest that programmers should move towards service&support instead. Try to spend $1 million dollars on development and then try to make that up on support when _anyone_ who hasn't spent the money can compete with you without the costs. Don't work...
A business can actually be successful by building pseudo-ownership like trademark. An example of this is Redhat that most people associate Linux with. For them the Linux developers are free labour really. That it's technically service&support really doesn't mean anything. People go to Redhat because they want Linux solutions, not because they think it's a service.
I like to add that I run both Linux _and_ W2K. every version/vendor of Linux I have ever installed have always ended up unstable when messed around with for awhile.
Offtopic?????? You know what the word topic means, right?:)
And just how is that post offtopic, can it be more ontopic? I just pointed out that open source is not very well peer reviewed in general. Right on topic...
Very difficult! Normally you have to show that you have been harmed (economically) but since you are giving it away that is very hard to do.
If such a case would appear in court I don't think anything would happen really.
The major problems with all the dot-coms are that they are run by a couple of geeks that have no clue what so ever.
Just look at all the open source zealots here on slashdot that actually thinks service&support is a working business model. Grab a calculator, check out any software development company and you will see that bankruptcy is what happens if they try to live on service&support alone.
Just take salaries (it is a hell of alot more but anyway). A person typically costs twice his/her salary. Say a company develops a piece of software with 100 employees, each one earning around $3500/month.
Actually, selling products for less than it costs is illegal except for short times and some other exceptions.
The reason for this law is that big corp shall not be able to kill small corp just by selling their stuff too cheap just until small corp goes bankrupt. Big corp usually has more money to put in and therefore they can do this.
It's quite strange that the dot-coms has been allowed to sell at loss (or near). They shouldn't have been allowed to.
Just look at the current open source fiasco. People where supposed to make their income from service and support. Take away the VC money (in the long run the company must survive on its own) and the income from those companies are worse than poor and this will continue to be the case.
If that money is supposed to be for salaries the software industry will soon have worse than poor salaries for its hired people.
Haven't you seen how much people make mods? Since the market is spammed with mods none can charge for their work.
Noone should be more anonymous online than they are in "real life". Normally you are always responsible for your action and this should also be the case online I think.
I have absolutely nothing against P2P in itself, just the theft part that is so common.
The best thing would be I think if the copyright holders could develop software that recognise their copyrighted material (Mp3 example: first recognise the name, then grab it and analyse the music) and only go after those who break the law (make them pay for the losses they cause) and the rest of us could use P2P to whatever we want as long as it isn't illegal.
Unfortunately it's not used very much for discussing politics and other important applications of free speech.
It's mainly used for theft. Protect copyrighted material from it and the whole problem is solved.
I really don't understand the nagging that takes place here on slashdot each time some copy protection comes along. If it did we could discuss politics all we want without anyone (except China and similar countries) taking the service down.
"Bullshit. Research must ALWAYS be done if you want your company to have an edge over the competition. "
You mean that if a company invest $1 billion into research trying to find the cure for example cancer (with a huge bunch of researchers developing it for say 10 years (not a very uncommon figure in medicine development)) and I can start-up a small company with $10.000 I have on they bank and clone their product they would be able to get their $1 billion back?
You can't even possibly be serious?!
There are countries in the world that work like that (China and Cuba for example) and they are not very famous for bringing new advances to the world. Have you ever thought about why this is the case?
So thats why the public wealth is so great and the production of high-class medicines is so successful in China and Cuba where they have that system. Have always wondered.
Slashdot Mirror
Do Volvo and Toyota give their blueprints away?
How come people think business secrets are something exclusive to software?
IP is a huge part of ANY business.
They all get much work done by volunteers for free. Free labour.
If you split the total income from free software on all the people developing it you will find that there is _no way_ people can live on it.
What kind of solution is that? Most programmers should give their work away for free so that others with strong trademarks can sell it instead (call it support if you think that's more fun).
Business is built on ownership in different forms like property, trading, trademarks and patents.
The GPL is aimed at removing ownership (read, "why software should not have owners" on the GNU homepage if you haven't got that), of cause it hurts businesses! That's its core goal! You, who suggest it doesn't, listen to yourself for Christ sake!
However, it doesn't hurt business as much as it hurts programmers. Programmers should _give_ their work away for free.
Don't suggest that programmers should move towards service&support instead. Try to spend $1 million dollars on development and then try to make that up on support when _anyone_ who hasn't spent the money can compete with you without the costs. Don't work...
A business can actually be successful by building pseudo-ownership like trademark. An example of this is Redhat that most people associate Linux with. For them the Linux developers are free labour really. That it's technically service&support really doesn't mean anything. People go to Redhat because they want Linux solutions, not because they think it's a service.
I like to add that I run both Linux _and_ W2K. every version/vendor of Linux I have ever installed have always ended up unstable when messed around with for awhile.
Ms have bugs but so do Linux.
Agreed, the worst problem so far is the lack of support and people to hire knowing open source os'es and software.
Offtopic?????? You know what the word topic means, right? :)
And just how is that post offtopic, can it be more ontopic? I just pointed out that open source is not very well peer reviewed in general. Right on topic...
Very difficult! Normally you have to show that you have been harmed (economically) but since you are giving it away that is very hard to do. If such a case would appear in court I don't think anything would happen really.
The major problems with all the dot-coms are that they are run by a couple of geeks that have no clue what so ever.
Just look at all the open source zealots here on slashdot that actually thinks service&support is a working business model. Grab a calculator, check out any software development company and you will see that bankruptcy is what happens if they try to live on service&support alone.
Just take salaries (it is a hell of alot more but anyway). A person typically costs twice his/her salary. Say a company develops a piece of software with 100 employees, each one earning around $3500/month.
You do the math.
Actually, the content providers was in trouble when the radio was invented and when the TV.
It fixed itself (with laws and some control) because the consumers want good content and good content required money to be produced.
Actually, selling products for less than it costs is illegal except for short times and some other exceptions.
The reason for this law is that big corp shall not be able to kill small corp just by selling their stuff too cheap just until small corp goes bankrupt. Big corp usually has more money to put in and therefore they can do this.
It's quite strange that the dot-coms has been allowed to sell at loss (or near). They shouldn't have been allowed to.
Fair use act?
These people are going to get so sued!
so...?
How many mods and expansions are commercial today? Not many...
Just look at the current open source fiasco. People where supposed to make their income from service and support. Take away the VC money (in the long run the company must survive on its own) and the income from those companies are worse than poor and this will continue to be the case.
If that money is supposed to be for salaries the software industry will soon have worse than poor salaries for its hired people.
Haven't you seen how much people make mods? Since the market is spammed with mods none can charge for their work.
Noone should be more anonymous online than they are in "real life". Normally you are always responsible for your action and this should also be the case online I think.
We aren't in real life. You are always responsible for your actions. Why shouldn't you be that also when you are online?
I have absolutely nothing against P2P in itself, just the theft part that is so common.
The best thing would be I think if the copyright holders could develop software that recognise their copyrighted material (Mp3 example: first recognise the name, then grab it and analyse the music) and only go after those who break the law (make them pay for the losses they cause) and the rest of us could use P2P to whatever we want as long as it isn't illegal.
Grab the mp3's from your CD, how hard can it be?
Is wide-spread theft a good thing just because you are too lazy to press the "grab cd" button?
Is there a problem using e-mail or some other medium that don't let you search or act anonymously to do this?
Unfortunately it's not used very much for discussing politics and other important applications of free speech.
It's mainly used for theft. Protect copyrighted material from it and the whole problem is solved.
I really don't understand the nagging that takes place here on slashdot each time some copy protection comes along. If it did we could discuss politics all we want without anyone (except China and similar countries) taking the service down.
Free speech yes. Theft no.
This is scary! I really hope this one is a joke (?).
Why do you think the murdurrate in US where guns are allowed are higher than (for example) Europe where they aren't?
Its just insanity that everyone should carry guns.
Witch laws are you refering to?
The laws that grants people the right to charge for their own work?
Use e-mail if it isn't copyrighted material or upload/download to a free web/file server.
P2P are _primary_ used for piracy and I wish people would stop this hypocrisy.
"Bullshit. Research must ALWAYS be done if you want your company to have an edge over the competition. "
You mean that if a company invest $1 billion into research trying to find the cure for example cancer (with a huge bunch of researchers developing it for say 10 years (not a very uncommon figure in medicine development)) and I can start-up a small company with $10.000 I have on they bank and clone their product they would be able to get their $1 billion back?
You can't even possibly be serious?!
There are countries in the world that work like that (China and Cuba for example) and they are not very famous for bringing new advances to the world. Have you ever thought about why this is the case?
Oh!
So thats why the public wealth is so great and the production of high-class medicines is so successful in China and Cuba where they have that system. Have always wondered.
Thanks for enlighten me!