You own any particular copy of Linux that you acquire or make. You don't own the copyright, but a copyright more like a lien on other peoples' property. You still own the actual copy.
With Windows, OTOH, you allegedly enter into a contract when you open the CD in which you agree that you do not assume ownership of your copy, but merely license its use from Microsoft in accordance with their terms. (For example, a maximum of 5 network connections are permitted. If you actually owned your copy of the software, you could make as many connections as you wish.)
If you work for someone, and they don't pay you, have they stolen from you?
No. You're being just as sloppy as with copyright infringement.
And if the employer declares bankruptcy, he won't even be legally required to ever pay you. You can't get a free pass like that from the consequences of *genuine* theft.
I ask myself what drives the sick people who create such things. What can we do to provide more disincentives to keep them from being jerks?
There are 6 billion people on this planet, and it only takes one of them to launch a worm. With a sample that large, there's no way that a worm won't get written if a vulnerability exists and generally known. There's always going to be at least one crazy who'll do it regardless of any disincentives. Peoples' energy is better directed at eliminating the vulnerabilities in the first place.
Money is an abstract, one-dimensional quantity. Not everything in the real world can be projected onto that axis.
Most people realize this, and believe it or not, they sometimes make a decision without obsessing over how to enter it into an account book. Perhaps you ought to try it.
why does a "hybrid" get much less gas mileage than my old technology simple internal combustion engine with a CARBERATOR? something is very wrong with these hybrids.
Compare your Geo's zero-to-60mph time with a hybrid. You'll find your answer there.
This is based on the (somewhat dumb, imo) concept that 'using' (ie running) the software involves making a copy (from permanent store to RAM)
Some courts have bought that argument, but it's just plain wrong. Since software is essentially useless unless it's loaded into RAM, it clearly falls under the realm of fair use.
This argument is like saying that since a copy of the image of a book needs to be projected onto your retina when you read it, then you can't read the book without an explicit license. I'll choose to believe that if the issue ever made it to the Supreme Court, it would be thrown out.
Thanks for making the rest of us pay inflated fees because you are too cheap to go to U-Haul and buy them like a normal person.
UPS's management is the one making you pay inflated fees.
It doesn't take a genius to figure out that if they hand out free boxes, some people are going to take advantage of it.
If they felt like it, they could easily fix the problem by charging for the box up front and then rebating the box fee when the customer ships something in it. You can't expect to change the statistical behavior of the general public, but UPS's management could change their box policies.
BTW, if you want to see an "inflated fee", check out what they charge for boxes at U-Haul. (But I suppose they have to make up for renting out trucks for $14.99 per day somehow.)
It's not a use that's anything like using a fork or a knife, which is what your originally lamented that you couldn't do. Instead, you want to manufacture knockoff tableware for free.
what if a business or an individual wanted to use a program to SELL for a huge profit a program
Then they would publish it under some kind of license. But guess what: you wouldn't be able to freely redistribute that software either. At best you could use it just like the GPL'd software. (Except you'd also be out some "huge" amount of cash, and you likely couldn't actually use it like a knife or a fork because of additional restrictions in the EULA beyond copyright law.)
You can't have your cake and eat it too.
As the saying goes: If you don't like the GPL, write your own damned code.
I bet I can find other restrictions on the USE of GPL software also.
I suggest you start your quest by actually reading the GPL.
I especially can't think in pound-feet, which is what this author expects me to do.
Well then, that's no problem, as lbf means "pounds-force", not pounds*feet (which would be a measure of torque).
Here's a hint: a serving of beer weighs about a pound. One lbf is how much force you must use to hold it up (assuming you're drinking it somewhere on Earth).
It's also equivalent to about 4.44 newtons, but that unit is too small to provide a satisfactory serving.
Well, for starters, it would be nice if the ISP didn't require you to install some crappy ActiveX control just to get into the support section of their website.
Usually, all I want to know is something like the DNS name of their mail server. Why should I need to let them take over my machine to find that out?
At least in my area, local phone service itself still seems to be open to competition. For example, I've been getting junk mail from TDS for both phone service and broadband with prices that seem too good to be true (which makes me skeptical of their offer).
The article doesn't say whether this ruling will have any effect on phone service. Does it just mean that your DSL will be bound to whatever phone service you choose, or will phone service also end up being tied to the local Baby Bell who owns the wire to your house?
Are you seriously saying you had a mouse in 1985? Unless you were using an early Mac, it's not bloody likley.
Mouse Systems started selling optical mice for PCs around 1983, before there even was an "early Mac". Microsoft Paint, a mouse-driven app, was introduced in 1984.
I was using Futurenet, a PC-based circuit design program that came bundled with a Mouse Systems mouse, around 1985.
The reponsibility of the government in the free market is to prevent laws from being broken so that property owners are secure in knowing that their property cannot be stolen.
Go back and read the Constitution. Copyrights were not introduced in order to create a new kind of "property" that could be "stolen".
Any property-like features associated with copyrights were a windfall benefit side effect of the particular method used to promote creation of more content. Property-like features are a means to an end, not an end in themselves, and copyright infringement is not the same as theft.
Therefore, the government's primary interest should NOT be to try to protect individual copyright holders from every last instance of illicit copying. If anything, the government's role should be creating an environment where the maximum amount of content is being produced, regardless of how much infringement is included in that environment. Sentencing teenagers to hard time over illicit copies of bubblegum pop songs is almost certainly not the best way to achieve that goal.
Some presume that raising an issue like this will make the issue snowball on the Cisco board and make them roll over and say "OK China, we won't sell you any more equipment until you respect human rights."
I say, with all due respect, to those of you that really think that is going to happen... that you're out of your friggin' minds.
If you think this is true because it's unlikely that the proposal will pass, then say so. (IMO, it probably is unlikely.)
However, if it were to pass, then the board would be legally obliged to "roll over" and act as the owners of the company direct.
Again, I say... Cisco is not in the business of telling governments how to run their affairs.
Again, Cisco is in whatever business its shareholders say it's in. Again, what constitutes "shareholder value" is determined by the shareholders, not by you.
But the Committee of Public Safety did make radical changes to the calendar, 18 centuries later than the Romans. But don't let fact get in the way of an opportunity to make a snippy comment.
The USPTO management is not concerned about the loss of human examiners. Trials of their new Pitney Bowes Stampmaster 5000-EX have shown that a fully automated application processing machine can rubber-stamp applications at a rate exceeding that of 1800 human examiners using old-fashioned hand stamps and inkpads. Current plans call for phasing out the examiners completely over the coming months.
Although most software will be fairly easily patched, it still seems like a hastle.
It's going to be an insignificant drop in the patch ocean. For example, the Fedora project has been spewing out patches and upgrades at the rate of > 1GB per month. Updating one little timezone file will be nothing.
In this age of multiple monthly critical security bugs posted for every OS on the market, if you haven't done any updates at least once by this fall, you've got bigger problems than an unset clock.
But there is no way to adjust it for states that use it, but at different dates that are hardwired into it.
Now that's just really stupid. The DST dates have changed many times over history. It would take a real dimwit to assume that the dates would never change again in the future.
Do you really think that somebody who went through all of the paranoid steps that the OP described would neglect to lock the case? Just about every PC case that I've ever seen has been lockable.
Slashdot Mirror
You own any particular copy of Linux that you acquire or make. You don't own the copyright, but a copyright more like a lien on other peoples' property. You still own the actual copy.
With Windows, OTOH, you allegedly enter into a contract when you open the CD in which you agree that you do not assume ownership of your copy, but merely license its use from Microsoft in accordance with their terms. (For example, a maximum of 5 network connections are permitted. If you actually owned your copy of the software, you could make as many connections as you wish.)
The grammar checker interrupts with a huge explosion and shouts "HUMILIATION!"
Then it shows your document being burned to ashes and puts you back at a blank page one.
No. You're being just as sloppy as with copyright infringement.
And if the employer declares bankruptcy, he won't even be legally required to ever pay you. You can't get a free pass like that from the consequences of *genuine* theft.
There are 6 billion people on this planet, and it only takes one of them to launch a worm. With a sample that large, there's no way that a worm won't get written if a vulnerability exists and generally known. There's always going to be at least one crazy who'll do it regardless of any disincentives. Peoples' energy is better directed at eliminating the vulnerabilities in the first place.
No, it's not.
Reread my original post and try to understand it this time. You could stand to use the advice in it.
Most people realize this, and believe it or not, they sometimes make a decision without obsessing over how to enter it into an account book. Perhaps you ought to try it.
ConSchmon
More likely, it's the additional cost of transporting the gasoline from the refineries, which tend to be located near Texas.
Compare your Geo's zero-to-60mph time with a hybrid. You'll find your answer there.
Some courts have bought that argument, but it's just plain wrong. Since software is essentially useless unless it's loaded into RAM, it clearly falls under the realm of fair use.
This argument is like saying that since a copy of the image of a book needs to be projected onto your retina when you read it, then you can't read the book without an explicit license. I'll choose to believe that if the issue ever made it to the Supreme Court, it would be thrown out.
UPS's management is the one making you pay inflated fees. It doesn't take a genius to figure out that if they hand out free boxes, some people are going to take advantage of it.
If they felt like it, they could easily fix the problem by charging for the box up front and then rebating the box fee when the customer ships something in it. You can't expect to change the statistical behavior of the general public, but UPS's management could change their box policies.
BTW, if you want to see an "inflated fee", check out what they charge for boxes at U-Haul. (But I suppose they have to make up for renting out trucks for $14.99 per day somehow.)
It's not a use that's anything like using a fork or a knife, which is what your originally lamented that you couldn't do. Instead, you want to manufacture knockoff tableware for free.
what if a business or an individual wanted to use a program to SELL for a huge profit a program
Then they would publish it under some kind of license. But guess what: you wouldn't be able to freely redistribute that software either. At best you could use it just like the GPL'd software. (Except you'd also be out some "huge" amount of cash, and you likely couldn't actually use it like a knife or a fork because of additional restrictions in the EULA beyond copyright law.)
You can't have your cake and eat it too. As the saying goes: If you don't like the GPL, write your own damned code.
I bet I can find other restrictions on the USE of GPL software also.
I suggest you start your quest by actually reading the GPL.
You don't need any license to use a GPL'd program. You only need a license if you want to redistribute it.
The reason you need the license to redistribute the computer program is because copyright law says you have no right to do so otherwise.
Well then, that's no problem, as lbf means "pounds-force", not pounds*feet (which would be a measure of torque).
Here's a hint: a serving of beer weighs about a pound. One lbf is how much force you must use to hold it up (assuming you're drinking it somewhere on Earth).
It's also equivalent to about 4.44 newtons, but that unit is too small to provide a satisfactory serving.
Well, for starters, it would be nice if the ISP didn't require you to install some crappy ActiveX control just to get into the support section of their website.
Usually, all I want to know is something like the DNS name of their mail server. Why should I need to let them take over my machine to find that out?
The article doesn't say whether this ruling will have any effect on phone service. Does it just mean that your DSL will be bound to whatever phone service you choose, or will phone service also end up being tied to the local Baby Bell who owns the wire to your house?
Mouse Systems started selling optical mice for PCs around 1983, before there even was an "early Mac". Microsoft Paint, a mouse-driven app, was introduced in 1984.
I was using Futurenet, a PC-based circuit design program that came bundled with a Mouse Systems mouse, around 1985.
Go back and read the Constitution. Copyrights were not introduced in order to create a new kind of "property" that could be "stolen".
Any property-like features associated with copyrights were a windfall benefit side effect of the particular method used to promote creation of more content. Property-like features are a means to an end, not an end in themselves, and copyright infringement is not the same as theft.
Therefore, the government's primary interest should NOT be to try to protect individual copyright holders from every last instance of illicit copying. If anything, the government's role should be creating an environment where the maximum amount of content is being produced, regardless of how much infringement is included in that environment. Sentencing teenagers to hard time over illicit copies of bubblegum pop songs is almost certainly not the best way to achieve that goal.
I say, with all due respect, to those of you that really think that is going to happen... that you're out of your friggin' minds.
If you think this is true because it's unlikely that the proposal will pass, then say so. (IMO, it probably is unlikely.)
However, if it were to pass, then the board would be legally obliged to "roll over" and act as the owners of the company direct.
Again, I say... Cisco is not in the business of telling governments how to run their affairs.
Again, Cisco is in whatever business its shareholders say it's in. Again, what constitutes "shareholder value" is determined by the shareholders, not by you.
But the Committee of Public Safety did make radical changes to the calendar, 18 centuries later than the Romans. But don't let fact get in the way of an opportunity to make a snippy comment.
The USPTO management is not concerned about the loss of human examiners. Trials of their new Pitney Bowes Stampmaster 5000-EX have shown that a fully automated application processing machine can rubber-stamp applications at a rate exceeding that of 1800 human examiners using old-fashioned hand stamps and inkpads. Current plans call for phasing out the examiners completely over the coming months.
Yes, 8-track players had terrible problems with wow and flutter.
It's going to be an insignificant drop in the patch ocean. For example, the Fedora project has been spewing out patches and upgrades at the rate of > 1GB per month. Updating one little timezone file will be nothing.
In this age of multiple monthly critical security bugs posted for every OS on the market, if you haven't done any updates at least once by this fall, you've got bigger problems than an unset clock.
Now that's just really stupid. The DST dates have changed many times over history. It would take a real dimwit to assume that the dates would never change again in the future.
Do you really think that somebody who went through all of the paranoid steps that the OP described would neglect to lock the case? Just about every PC case that I've ever seen has been lockable.