They have to be outside of the economic zone to the US not to be able to touch them. However the US is happy to board ships anywhere they choose to.
Assuming the US wanted to board a ship. If they were to simply want to sink one there are submarines and aircraft carriers as well as US airbases in all sorts of places.
Ships have to sale under the flag of a nation. If they do so, they are legally part of that nation, and have to heave to and let the coast guard and navy of that nation board.
In return they are under the protection of that nation's navy. It is possible for for another nation's navy or coast guard to board but they must have permission from the government concerned.
It's just that a lot of crimes are state or local crimes in the US, and don't exist at sea
That's because a US flagged ship isn't part of any US state or city...
The other option is to sale under no flag. At which point you're a pirate vessel, you can't dock anywhere except a few quasilegal ports, and not only can any military board you, they can legally just sink you if they feel like it.
In practice anyone can...
(Legally according to international law, that is. Possibly not according to their own law.)
A navy could possibly be breaking their own nation's laws to ignore a pirate ship within or close to their territorial waters.
Considering that the military had no qualms boarding and shutting down ships (e.g. radio caroline) that broadcast "pirate" radio stations, when they were reluctant to do that to ships running hard drugs or terrorist arms, I don't think that would be a wise idea.
That's because drugs and arms are generally smuggled with legitimate cargo. If the authorities knoew that a ship was only carrying such things then it had better have decent lifeboats.
The lawlessness I'd exploit would be COPYRIGHT. Seriously.... the MPAA and the RIAA have been successfull in shutting down or going after distribution networks, never the root uploaders or the downloaders.
Which would make you a real pirate.
Set up a blatently illegal server system well off shore, enjoy the benefits of satellite based internet access. Sell movies and music an pennies on the dollar at high quality....
This might work if you can find an invisible ship and work out a way to make your internet connection other than a nice target for an AGM-88!
They'd have to be damn far off shore for that to work - more than 200 knots. It doesn't have to be flagged anywhere, if it doesn't ever come to port, but at some point they'll need service, so being flagged would be wise.
An unflagged ship on the high seas is "fair game" to anyone who wants to either take it or sink it. Such a ship would need to be supplied with fuel and food.
Hmmm...If I were Homeland Security and became aware of a "cruise" ship, just 3-miles off my country's coast loaded with antennas, computers and foreign technicians would I have a problem with that?
If it's not flying the flag of a nation state recognised by the US all you'd have to do is tell the US Navy they can use it for "target practice".
Would I allow them satellite ISP service or JAM it?
Jamming is likely to be more expensive than sinking it. Especially given that you really don't want to have to deal with complains from any other ships which might lose their service.
The US, and all militaries, are legally free to impose their will on any flagless ships, in their own country's waters or international waters. (And even in other country's waters unless the other country objects.)
"Object" in this context means able to do something about it. e.g. sink the invading ships, bomb their home country, etc.
But this just seems to be asking for a lot of trouble. Humanitarily speaking, since they are not actually in any country, who protects the rights of those 600 laboring software engineers?
A ship is considered the territory of the flag it flys. There is a real risk of actual "software piracy" going on here. The US authorities won't lift a finger to help, but they are likely to take an interest if this ship is armed or another country's warship turns up to protect it.
From SourcingMag:
Before you think, "sweat-ship," hear them out. These workers, they say, will each have private rooms with baths, meal service, laundry service, housekeeping and access to on-board leisure-time activities. Picture the Love Boat with a timecard. Staff can make the three-mile voyage into town in their off hours by calling a water taxi.
Only if they have the relevent documents to enter the US in the first place...
I can see why some people would have a problem with this, such as those that see Linux as a networking OS or for more of an embedded system.
With an embedded system you would typically have a different system for doing all development work. The development system is where all the compiling and optimisation is done. The actual embedded system would not have (no should it need) any kind of development tools at all.
But if Linux folks ever want to see Linux as an OS for the masses, you have you cater to the average joe, and offer all of these features for games and video and the like,
This comparison is just switching one varied set of I/O devices for another.
So they should trust their technical work to someone without any real experience? Students and new grads do fine with the proper mentoring, but you don't want to bet your company on them.
If you "subcontract" your support, which includes buying proprietary software as an "off the shelf" product, you have no idea of either the experience or the competance of the people you are paying for. There is plenty of proprietary software apparently written by people with little understanding of the basic requirements of the task as well as that containing complex "easter eggs". It might even be hard for a student to do a worst job of it...
As for other situations. If you are going to get a certain level of support for a product (new features, custom installations), that is going to cost you a certain number of dollars,
Or even a more valuable currency:)
whether it be licensing costs (you need to be a large enough customer to have that level of influence with a vendor), or it be in hiring developer time to work on an OS project.
Note that this isn't an exclusive or. It's perfectly possible for bespoke systems to be based around proprietary software. Where there are issues surrounding support for the "base" being dropped, how such systems are licenced and the risk to the customer of being sold pirated software.
I would love to see some sort of feature wishlist where smaller companies could vote with their dollars on certain bugs or features.
Software has an intersting property that changes cost, but duplication does not.
I think that the underlying issue is a human resources one. CA wants Linus and Andrew to spend all of their time working on "Enterprise" features
If CA want these features, whatever they might be, then maybe they should be doing the development.
none of it on things like improving Linux's real-time performance and integrating drivers for non-server hardware.
CA need to realise that Linux is a general purpose OS. It's quite possible that "real-time performance" especially low spec hardware is of far more commercial value than "Enterprise" anyway...
There are a lot of consequences here, such as internal corporate communications.
This is probably the worst possible example. Since there is only one party, the corporation in question, involved here. The GPL would only be any kind of an issue here in the case of external communications.
It appears to make the use of GPL fonts undesirable in almost any document.
It is also relevent if the document is electronic or printed...
So it's not a collection agency at all, but a RIAA's outsourced extortion division. The extortion attempt is not a collection agency trying to collect on a debt, but a bunch of scummy lawyers trying to intimidate her to settle the case before going to court.
It's also probably a "shell company" with no actual assets of it's own. Thus protected against being countersued.
You make a common mistake believing that musicians actually make money off albums. Record companies make all the money and often drive their artists into poverty. You don't hear about them because they're not one of the ten bands/groups/whatever that you hear on the radio.
Even the "sucessful" ones appear to have a rather high rate of bankruptcy, insanity & suicide.
Namely, if there's GPL code out there, you have access to the source code. Then someone takes your code, makes some modifications and does not release it GPL.
Remember that the GPL does not require that you "release" anything.
Everyone has lost rights in this situation, as no one is now able to get the source code.
The original code is still there. Making modifications is likely to create a "derived work". Thus if the modifying party distributes the modified version under any other terms than the GPL they are effectivly pirating someone else's software.
Gee, you mean if I embed GPL'ed code in my application, ignore the GPL and copyright it people can go to jail for using the orginal GPL'd code I ripped off.
Except that copyright law dosn't work that way. By distributing the GPL code you'd be enguaging in copyright infringement. Depending how you "embeded" the software your entire program might be a derived work of the GPL code. Anyway most judges would take a rather dim view of a software pirate trying to sue other parties for software piracy.
Ironically, the original application of copyright was to prevent corporate masters from abusing content producers by hording all the profits and unfairly restricting access to works.
Actually the original application of copyright was to enable the state, to control what could and could not be printed. Both to prevent things being printed which the King didn't like and to protect clerics (who had more or less a monopoly on book publishing).
Without wishing to put words into others mouths, I do believe the intention of the authors of the GPL was to take a flawed system (IP/copyright law) and use it against itself.
Or to use the laws in ways more consistent with their original intent. Considering that the GPL was invented in the US and the US Constitution explicitally states what "Intellectual Property" type laws should be used for.
But everytime you hear "RIAA sues another 200 people" in the headlines at least a handful of them are let off because the accusations were so outlandish compared to reality.
Really? IIRC the RIAA's tactics included offering reduced "damages" to have the case not come to court. How many of these cases have resulted in court injunctions or judgements?
Also, the exact amount is decided by a court on a case-by-case basis and it is very unlikely that the court will fine them with the maximum amount or imprison the CEOs, even for the most blatant and gross violations of the injunction.
Depends how the judge is feeling on the day. German judges might not be so "corporate friendly" as US judges.
Without his tenacity and know-how, companies will walk all over us. If you think he isn't deserving of these words, consider that he had to spend 40 hours to discover that Fortinet has indeed violating the GPL. Those assholes were using encryption to obfuscate their use of GPL code.
Thus implying that this wasn't "accidental piracy". Using such obfuscation points very much to their knowing full well that they were enguaging in "commercial software piracy".
But consider the average user, and consider a task as commonplace as installing a program. This can be a bit of a hurdle in Windows, but it's mostly clicking "Next", choosing paths and clicking "Finish" at the end (sometimes interrupted with entering a CD/serial key).
In many situations installing software is something which the average user should not be doing in the first place. It can easily mean that instead of a tool to help someone do their job they have an expensive paperweight on their desk. This is something which greatly contributes to Windows TCO. So much so that there are 3rd party addons sold to make it more difficult for end users to mess around with Windows. In the worst case senario everyone loses their jobs due to using unlicenced software.
Slashdot Mirror
They have to be outside of the economic zone to the US not to be able to touch them. However the US is happy to board ships anywhere they choose to.
Assuming the US wanted to board a ship. If they were to simply want to sink one there are submarines and aircraft carriers as well as US airbases in all sorts of places.
Ships have to sale under the flag of a nation. If they do so, they are legally part of that nation, and have to heave to and let the coast guard and navy of that nation board.
In return they are under the protection of that nation's navy. It is possible for for another nation's navy or coast guard to board but they must have permission from the government concerned.
It's just that a lot of crimes are state or local crimes in the US, and don't exist at sea
That's because a US flagged ship isn't part of any US state or city...
The other option is to sale under no flag. At which point you're a pirate vessel, you can't dock anywhere except a few quasilegal ports, and not only can any military board you, they can legally just sink you if they feel like it.
In practice anyone can...
(Legally according to international law, that is. Possibly not according to their own law.)
A navy could possibly be breaking their own nation's laws to ignore a pirate ship within or close to their territorial waters.
Considering that the military had no qualms boarding and shutting down ships (e.g. radio caroline) that broadcast "pirate" radio stations, when they were reluctant to do that to ships running hard drugs or terrorist arms, I don't think that would be a wise idea.
That's because drugs and arms are generally smuggled with legitimate cargo. If the authorities knoew that a ship was only carrying such things then it had better have decent lifeboats.
The lawlessness I'd exploit would be COPYRIGHT. Seriously.... the MPAA and the RIAA have been successfull in shutting down or going after distribution networks, never the root uploaders or the downloaders.
Which would make you a real pirate.
Set up a blatently illegal server system well off shore, enjoy the benefits of satellite based internet access. Sell movies and music an pennies on the dollar at high quality....
This might work if you can find an invisible ship and work out a way to make your internet connection other than a nice target for an AGM-88!
They'd have to be damn far off shore for that to work - more than 200 knots. It doesn't have to be flagged anywhere, if it doesn't ever come to port, but at some point they'll need service, so being flagged would be wise.
An unflagged ship on the high seas is "fair game" to anyone who wants to either take it or sink it. Such a ship would need to be supplied with fuel and food.
Hmmm...If I were Homeland Security and became aware of a "cruise" ship, just 3-miles off my country's coast loaded with antennas, computers and foreign technicians would I have a problem with that?
If it's not flying the flag of a nation state recognised by the US all you'd have to do is tell the US Navy they can use it for "target practice".
Would I allow them satellite ISP service or JAM it?
Jamming is likely to be more expensive than sinking it. Especially given that you really don't want to have to deal with complains from any other ships which might lose their service.
The US, and all militaries, are legally free to impose their will on any flagless ships, in their own country's waters or international waters. (And even in other country's waters unless the other country objects.)
"Object" in this context means able to do something about it. e.g. sink the invading ships, bomb their home country, etc.
Now, if there was a ship registered to and flying the flag of another nations, perhaps the US respects the 3nm international convention.
It's probably more dependent on exactly which country.
But this just seems to be asking for a lot of trouble. Humanitarily speaking, since they are not actually in any country, who protects the rights of those 600 laboring software engineers?
A ship is considered the territory of the flag it flys. There is a real risk of actual "software piracy" going on here. The US authorities won't lift a finger to help, but they are likely to take an interest if this ship is armed or another country's warship turns up to protect it.
From SourcingMag: Before you think, "sweat-ship," hear them out. These workers, they say, will each have private rooms with baths, meal service, laundry service, housekeeping and access to on-board leisure-time activities. Picture the Love Boat with a timecard. Staff can make the three-mile voyage into town in their off hours by calling a water taxi.
Only if they have the relevent documents to enter the US in the first place...
I can see why some people would have a problem with this, such as those that see Linux as a networking OS or for more of an embedded system.
With an embedded system you would typically have a different system for doing all development work. The development system is where all the compiling and optimisation is done. The actual embedded system would not have (no should it need) any kind of development tools at all.
But if Linux folks ever want to see Linux as an OS for the masses, you have you cater to the average joe, and offer all of these features for games and video and the like,
This comparison is just switching one varied set of I/O devices for another.
So they should trust their technical work to someone without any real experience? Students and new grads do fine with the proper mentoring, but you don't want to bet your company on them.
If you "subcontract" your support, which includes buying proprietary software as an "off the shelf" product, you have no idea of either the experience or the competance of the people you are paying for.
There is plenty of proprietary software apparently written by people with little understanding of the basic requirements of the task as well as that containing complex "easter eggs".
It might even be hard for a student to do a worst job of it...
As for other situations. If you are going to get a certain level of support for a product (new features, custom installations), that is going to cost you a certain number of dollars,
:)
Or even a more valuable currency
whether it be licensing costs (you need to be a large enough customer to have that level of influence with a vendor), or it be in hiring developer time to work on an OS project.
Note that this isn't an exclusive or. It's perfectly possible for bespoke systems to be based around proprietary software. Where there are issues surrounding support for the "base" being dropped, how such systems are licenced and the risk to the customer of being sold pirated software.
I would love to see some sort of feature wishlist where smaller companies could vote with their dollars on certain bugs or features.
Software has an intersting property that changes cost, but duplication does not.
I think that the underlying issue is a human resources one. CA wants Linus and Andrew to spend all of their time working on "Enterprise" features
If CA want these features, whatever they might be, then maybe they should be doing the development.
none of it on things like improving Linux's real-time performance and integrating drivers for non-server hardware.
CA need to realise that Linux is a general purpose OS. It's quite possible that "real-time performance" especially low spec hardware is of far more commercial value than "Enterprise" anyway...
There are a lot of consequences here, such as internal corporate communications.
This is probably the worst possible example. Since there is only one party, the corporation in question, involved here. The GPL would only be any kind of an issue here in the case of external communications.
It appears to make the use of GPL fonts undesirable in almost any document.
It is also relevent if the document is electronic or printed...
So it's not a collection agency at all, but a RIAA's outsourced extortion division. The extortion attempt is not a collection agency trying to collect on a debt, but a bunch of scummy lawyers trying to intimidate her to settle the case before going to court.
It's also probably a "shell company" with no actual assets of it's own. Thus protected against being countersued.
You make a common mistake believing that musicians actually make money off albums. Record companies make all the money and often drive their artists into poverty. You don't hear about them because they're not one of the ten bands/groups/whatever that you hear on the radio.
Even the "sucessful" ones appear to have a rather high rate of bankruptcy, insanity & suicide.
Namely, if there's GPL code out there, you have access to the source code. Then someone takes your code, makes some modifications and does not release it GPL.
Remember that the GPL does not require that you "release" anything.
Everyone has lost rights in this situation, as no one is now able to get the source code.
The original code is still there. Making modifications is likely to create a "derived work". Thus if the modifying party distributes the modified version under any other terms than the GPL they are effectivly pirating someone else's software.
Gee, you mean if I embed GPL'ed code in my application, ignore the GPL and copyright it people can go to jail for using the orginal GPL'd code I ripped off.
Except that copyright law dosn't work that way. By distributing the GPL code you'd be enguaging in copyright infringement. Depending how you "embeded" the software your entire program might be a derived work of the GPL code.
Anyway most judges would take a rather dim view of a software pirate trying to sue other parties for software piracy.
Ironically, the original application of copyright was to prevent corporate masters from abusing content producers by hording all the profits and unfairly restricting access to works.
Actually the original application of copyright was to enable the state, to control what could and could not be printed. Both to prevent things being printed which the King didn't like and to protect clerics (who had more or less a monopoly on book publishing).
Without wishing to put words into others mouths, I do believe the intention of the authors of the GPL was to take a flawed system (IP/copyright law) and use it against itself.
Or to use the laws in ways more consistent with their original intent. Considering that the GPL was invented in the US and the US Constitution explicitally states what "Intellectual Property" type laws should be used for.
But everytime you hear "RIAA sues another 200 people" in the headlines at least a handful of them are let off because the accusations were so outlandish compared to reality.
Really? IIRC the RIAA's tactics included offering reduced "damages" to have the case not come to court. How many of these cases have resulted in court injunctions or judgements?
Also, the exact amount is decided by a court on a case-by-case basis and it is very unlikely that the court will fine them with the maximum amount or imprison the CEOs, even for the most blatant and gross violations of the injunction.
Depends how the judge is feeling on the day. German judges might not be so "corporate friendly" as US judges.
Without his tenacity and know-how, companies will walk all over us. If you think he isn't deserving of these words, consider that he had to spend 40 hours to discover that Fortinet has indeed violating the GPL. Those assholes were using encryption to obfuscate their use of GPL code.
Thus implying that this wasn't "accidental piracy". Using such obfuscation points very much to their knowing full well that they were enguaging in "commercial software piracy".
Which ones? I mean, is there a single well-engineered product from Microsoft?
:)
Their hardware isn't bad. But they just badge it anyway
But consider the average user, and consider a task as commonplace as installing a program. This can be a bit of a hurdle in Windows, but it's mostly clicking "Next", choosing paths and clicking "Finish" at the end (sometimes interrupted with entering a CD/serial key).
In many situations installing software is something which the average user should not be doing in the first place.
It can easily mean that instead of a tool to help someone do their job they have an expensive paperweight on their desk.
This is something which greatly contributes to Windows TCO. So much so that there are 3rd party addons sold to make it more difficult for end users to mess around with Windows.
In the worst case senario everyone loses their jobs due to using unlicenced software.