You are correct sir. However, I don't think it will come from a lecture notes case, but rather from an email forwarding case: anytime you forward a email from someone to someone, without explicit permission, you are violating copyright (at least in the 'States, where everything automatically gets a copyright unless it is explicitly disclaimed).
Most of Canonical's time is spent tediously making everything brown; it is a wonder they have as many kernel contributions as they do when you consider how many things they have managed to turn brown.
You haven't needed to run nvidia-settings as root for a while; there is an nvidia-config or something along those lines that actually writes to your xorg.conf that requires super user privledges, but it is quite outdated.
> The problem is, of course, that they are trying to transmit all of their hundreds of channels to your TV simultaneously, and let the decoder pick out the interesting bits. If they only sent the one that you were watching, there wouldn't be a problem.
> Of course, then they'd have to discard their outmoded business model. So that won't happen. They'll just be marginalised and discarded in favour of internet distribution. It's the same thing that's happening to newspapers and bookstores - still around, but becoming less relevant every year.
> Cue their attempts to get laws passed to ban the new competition...
I'm not sure that you understand that cable is a shared medium, like broadcast.
I would think upgrading all of the set-top boxes to mpeg4 would be cheaper than rolling out fiber; there is nearly a 10:1 size*quality ratio between mpeg4 and mpeg2.
There was a very recent FCC ruling that said satellites could heavily recompress and rebroadcast terrestrial HD, I don't see why it wouldn't apply to cable companies as well.
I mean, since [the invention of gloves] we do not know where a crime may happen, the policy makers (who typically have about as much morality as a pea) have decided that the way around this is to have cameras everywhere. Public restrooms and your house included.
It isn't as clear cut as that; quick: explain how your made up law applies to sticking a gameboy game into a gameboy at which point the gameboy loads parts of it into memory. There is no EULA (there actually are EULAs in some instruction manuals, but under the law, without some sort of signature, click (tenuous), etc., such written blurbs are considered entirely nonbinding; under the law they only serve a function akin to the FBI warnings on video tapes).
>Except that it can't be proven he's agreed the the EULA.
It is possible that he clean room reversed the game using a partner, and never agreed to the EULA. But you and I both know that isn't what happened. Blizzard knows this's guy's real life identity; in obtaining a WoW subscription, you get billed under your legal name. I hope you can put two and two together.
Also, by the way, if it surprises you at all that Blizzard is using the shadiest of shady legal tactics, you didn't follow the bnetd case at all. Google it.
In the United States if you know someone is a party of a contract, and you knowingly interfere or aid them in breaking it, you can be sued. It is insane, since *you* never agreed to anything, but we also allow business method patents for Christ's sake. Anyway, how do you think *Google* got sued over taking that head Chinese Engineer from Microsoft who was under a non-compete? *They* certainly weren't a party to that guy's contract. It was under this crazy law (I believe this is just encoded in case law, not actual legislation, but I could be mistaken).
That seems totally bogus: music CDs have to be copied to ram (ever had a disc man with 8 second skip protection? Wow, I'm dating myself), but they don't have EULAs.
Shrinkwrap EULAs haven't been ruled enforceable. Especially since you can't read them until you open the box, and many stores don't do software returns (unless you return it for a copy of the same software.. which would of course have the same EULA). Now, the WoW subscriber agreement is enforceable and may cover the updated binaries that come through the WoW updater.
All he was saying is that there is no open source scholarship for someone who "might release a GPL'd Linux app soon". Particularly if they are only going to release it GPL if there is some sort of scholarship in it for them, as the tone of the submission generally implied.
I wasn't referring to the article, but rather the hypothetical article that would have been written if there was an ounce of sanity to this whole thing.
Slashdot Mirror
You are correct sir. However, I don't think it will come from a lecture notes case, but rather from an email forwarding case: anytime you forward a email from someone to someone, without explicit permission, you are violating copyright (at least in the 'States, where everything automatically gets a copyright unless it is explicitly disclaimed).
Most of Canonical's time is spent tediously making everything brown; it is a wonder they have as many kernel contributions as they do when you consider how many things they have managed to turn brown.
You haven't needed to run nvidia-settings as root for a while; there is an nvidia-config or something along those lines that actually writes to your xorg.conf that requires super user privledges, but it is quite outdated.
I'm going to second Unix Power Tools as an excellent book for learning the whole shebang, but point out that you might as well get Linux Power Tools.
> The problem is, of course, that they are trying to transmit all of their hundreds of channels to your TV simultaneously, and let the decoder pick out the interesting bits. If they only sent the one that you were watching, there wouldn't be a problem.
> Of course, then they'd have to discard their outmoded business model. So that won't happen. They'll just be marginalised and discarded in favour of internet distribution. It's the same thing that's happening to newspapers and bookstores - still around, but becoming less relevant every year.
> Cue their attempts to get laws passed to ban the new competition...
I'm not sure that you understand that cable is a shared medium, like broadcast.
I would think upgrading all of the set-top boxes to mpeg4 would be cheaper than rolling out fiber; there is nearly a 10:1 size*quality ratio between mpeg4 and mpeg2.
There was a very recent FCC ruling that said satellites could heavily recompress and rebroadcast terrestrial HD, I don't see why it wouldn't apply to cable companies as well.
Yes, because, computationally, MPEG4 is just as easy to decode as MPEG2, and all it will take is a firmware update. Sure. Moron.
Distopian nonsense.
I mean, since [the invention of gloves] we do not know where a crime may happen, the policy makers (who typically have about as much morality as a pea) have decided that the way around this is to have cameras everywhere. Public restrooms and your house included.
Only an engineer would be worried over the "problem" of how to allow people in a coffee shop to talk to one another.
It isn't as clear cut as that; quick: explain how your made up law applies to sticking a gameboy game into a gameboy at which point the gameboy loads parts of it into memory. There is no EULA (there actually are EULAs in some instruction manuals, but under the law, without some sort of signature, click (tenuous), etc., such written blurbs are considered entirely nonbinding; under the law they only serve a function akin to the FBI warnings on video tapes).
>Except that it can't be proven he's agreed the the EULA.
It is possible that he clean room reversed the game using a partner, and never agreed to the EULA. But you and I both know that isn't what happened. Blizzard knows this's guy's real life identity; in obtaining a WoW subscription, you get billed under your legal name. I hope you can put two and two together.
Also, by the way, if it surprises you at all that Blizzard is using the shadiest of shady legal tactics, you didn't follow the bnetd case at all. Google it.
Did you even read my comment? I clearly said:
>Now, the WoW subscriber agreement is enforceable and may cover the updated binaries that come through the WoW updater.
In the United States if you know someone is a party of a contract, and you knowingly interfere or aid them in breaking it, you can be sued. It is insane, since *you* never agreed to anything, but we also allow business method patents for Christ's sake. Anyway, how do you think *Google* got sued over taking that head Chinese Engineer from Microsoft who was under a non-compete? *They* certainly weren't a party to that guy's contract. It was under this crazy law (I believe this is just encoded in case law, not actual legislation, but I could be mistaken).
That seems totally bogus: music CDs have to be copied to ram (ever had a disc man with 8 second skip protection? Wow, I'm dating myself), but they don't have EULAs.
Shrinkwrap EULAs haven't been ruled enforceable. Especially since you can't read them until you open the box, and many stores don't do software returns (unless you return it for a copy of the same software.. which would of course have the same EULA). Now, the WoW subscriber agreement is enforceable and may cover the updated binaries that come through the WoW updater.
How on earth do you load the program into memory (and once again into CPU cache) to run it if you can't???
Do you ever cast UFO believers as irrational?
Couldn't it just be globs of neutrons?
All he was saying is that there is no open source scholarship for someone who "might release a GPL'd Linux app soon". Particularly if they are only going to release it GPL if there is some sort of scholarship in it for them, as the tone of the submission generally implied.
I wasn't referring to the article, but rather the hypothetical article that would have been written if there was an ounce of sanity to this whole thing.
So that you don't utterly throw anyone else off, it was *Paul* Cohen.
So your answer is yes, because to determine that, they would take his computers.
Won't matter since they look at the referer id as part of the sting.