... or did anyone else mistake the guy's name for "Richard Plotter"? I mean, the Dean of Civil Engineering at my university was named Russell Bridge; but a guy that overclocks his calculater named Richard Plotter would have beaten that hands down...
Although I am a creationist myself, I value open-mindedness in education. I do find it interesting that, even though none of them were actually there at the time, the scientific community in general are greatly offended by anyone who suggests that evolution (and likewise, I freely admit, creationism) is unproved and unprovable.
There's only one way to find out for sure - but unfortunately, though we'll all do it eventually, no-one who has done it is currently available for comment.
That's an interesting law, and you're probably right - that's what they'll go after him on. At least until he caves and tells them who gave him the info.
If I were his defence council (and like everyone else on/., IANAL) I would simply say that since the tips were all anonymous, he had no reasnable basis to know that the tips that turned out to be correct were any more or less likely to be truth than any others he received. As long as he does indeed receive tips that are wrong, Apple will have a very hard time proving to the required standard that he had a reasonable basis to believe the tips were true.
Sure, they may be confident, but they can't prove anything beyond reasonable doubt. BTW - is this is a criminal law or a civil law? The required level of proof of course is different. If it's a civil suit, the burden of proof is much lighter for the plaintiff.
If you check out the article, you'll find that this box has that too:
Pop-up Blocker - 6 months of free pop-up, adware, and spyware stopper
Web Content/Parental Control Filter - Web Content/Parental Control Filter 6 months of free built-in parental Control/Web Content Filter provides over 50 fully configurable filters that allow you to block websites and images.
Having said that, I can Australia & New Zealand following suit pretty soon after. Once these things get passed into US law, the WIPO forces everyone else to "harmonise" with them.
Funny how it's never the US who needs to harmonise with other countries where the lawmakers are not yet completely coopted by large corporate special interests. But that's because most of said special interests call the USA their home. If it were somewhere else, things would still be heading this way, but with a different nation "leading the way".
I believe it's been mentioned on/. before, but those who haven't read it should read Joel Bakan's "The Corporation". It's a very interesting read, and it will certainly open your eyes as to why this sort of thing is happening more and more. Unfortunately, Prof. Bakan hasn't come up with any suggestions as to how to deal with it that I can see working right now...
No, that would be Ericsson. Sony-Ericsson is a handset business only. Infrastructure is built by Ericsson.
And yes, I did leave NTT off the list. They were pivotal in the Japanse acceptance of WCDMA, but were not the driving force behind the standard itself. They have done a lot in carrier-grade linux and integrating that into their network also.
As a matter of fact it is; the WCDMA standards were driven out of Europe just like GSM.
In fact, the Release 99 3G network is a GSM/GPRS core network with a 3G radio access layer. In the next release, R4, the core begins to diverge from classical GSM. By the time you get to R6 almost everything is completely virtualised, with full separation between control and switching layers.
Anyway, while Japan and Korea are early adopters (Japan in particular), it's the same crew supplying the gear - Nokia, Ericsson, Siemens, Nortel. There is some NEC stuff in there too IIRC but mainly packet core (SGSN, GGSN).
While that's true, the difference is that in Korea and Japan there were a few large companies that spanned large regions or the whole country. And where the companies were regional, roaming onto other regions was neither difficult nor expensive.
In the USA by contrast, the Bell breakup shattered your industry into a million tiny competing pieces, who all went out and made life as difficult for each other as possible. That of course was the natural conclusion of the court order, which put so much fear of personal penalites (ie, you personally could go to jail) due to anti-trust issues into the company executives.
Also worth noting that for 3G, both Korea and Japan are following the rest of the world this time round and choosing WCDMA. It's likely that the US will be as isolated in it's 3G standard(s) as it was in 2G.
I work at Vodafone NZ; we've dealt with our Japanese colleagues on a few occasions relating to 3G. They brought their phones with them. Way cool. Some of that technology is filtering down to the 2G phones being manufactuerd by the likes of Sharp also.
Interesting was the speed with which they were able to roll out 3G sites: thousands of cells per month. Unlike us their 2G system is completely incompatible with WCDMA so they had no concerns with radio or core interoperability - and thus they were able to rollout at an unheard-of speed. Kudos to Vodafone K.K. They have been remarkably successful!
The thing I hate about snoop is that it's command line switches are almost, but not quite exactly, the same as tcpdump. I get them mixed up _all_ the time.:(
... but finally my country shows some spine. He should be prosecuted in Australia, under Australian law. If the department of public prosecutions has seen fit not to charge him, then it either means that a) they don't think there's a case, or b) they're out chasing murderers like they should be.
No offence intended to my American colleagues, but please respect everyone else's borders!
Wow, you'd think someone would have come up with that already... But wait, I think they did - it's called "Bluetooth".
Apart from the higher bandwidth I don't see anything in this article that isn't already possible with Bluetooth. And if you _really_ need higher bandwidth then there's 802.11.
Other than the "not invented here" factor, I can't imagine why Intel wants to invent aome new standard to do the same job as an existing one. Especially since that other one has taken 5 years to start catching on, and is now getting pretty popular. How long would it take for this one to do the same?
- it's not really designed to. Sure, the big organised crime gangs will get around it with no problems at all. But it will stop the casual counterfeiter. This is what it is designed to do.
The problem of course is that _sometimes_ it gets in the way of legitimate uses of digital technology. This is an example of one idiot ruining it for everyone. Life's like that. I pay high car insurance premiums because other people are stupid/lazy/drunk/asleep, even though I'm not.
Yeah, it's annoying, but that's life. It would just be nice if the companies would be more up-front about it. Good on Adobe for coming clean; but they needn't have denied it in the first place!
So again - if I just link against a library - even the XFree86 libraries - I'm _not_ writing a derived work. Thus this worry over license incompatibilities for derived works is a moot point.
(TM) This post incldues "IP" from Hayes, Inc, Netcomm Pty Ltd, The SCO Group, Microsoft, Jane Austin, George W. Bush, Tim Burton, Dave Brubeck, Anna Kournikova and Batman.
Perhaps that is the problem: the definition of a derivative. There must be a point at which you can say your work is not a derivative just because it uses a library call.
Parallels here with SCO vs. IBM - what is, or is not, a derivative? I would not think a program that used printf was a derivative of glibc any more than a novel which used the word "happiness" was a derivative of the Concise Oxford English Dictionary. However, as Linus has pointed out, a device driver probably qualifies, as you cannot write a device driver without intricately tieing it to the underlying OS.
Slashdot Mirror
You must have the most impressive pr0n collection known to mankind!
... or did anyone else mistake the guy's name for "Richard Plotter"? I mean, the Dean of Civil Engineering at my university was named Russell Bridge; but a guy that overclocks his calculater named Richard Plotter would have beaten that hands down...
Although I am a creationist myself, I value open-mindedness in education. I do find it interesting that, even though none of them were actually there at the time, the scientific community in general are greatly offended by anyone who suggests that evolution (and likewise, I freely admit, creationism) is unproved and unprovable.
There's only one way to find out for sure - but unfortunately, though we'll all do it eventually, no-one who has done it is currently available for comment.
That's an interesting law, and you're probably right - that's what they'll go after him on. At least until he caves and tells them who gave him the info.
/., IANAL) I would simply say that since the tips were all anonymous, he had no reasnable basis to know that the tips that turned out to be correct were any more or less likely to be truth than any others he received. As long as he does indeed receive tips that are wrong, Apple will have a very hard time proving to the required standard that he had a reasonable basis to believe the tips were true.
If I were his defence council (and like everyone else on
Sure, they may be confident, but they can't prove anything beyond reasonable doubt. BTW - is this is a criminal law or a civil law? The required level of proof of course is different. If it's a civil suit, the burden of proof is much lighter for the plaintiff.
If you check out the article, you'll find that this box has that too:
Pop-up Blocker - 6 months of free pop-up, adware, and spyware stopper
Web Content/Parental Control Filter - Web Content/Parental Control Filter 6 months of free built-in parental Control/Web Content Filter provides over 50 fully configurable filters that allow you to block websites and images.
Ugh.
PA-RISC...
Dude, is there something wrong with your "o"?
You must be new to /.
Welcome.
Funny how it's never the US who needs to harmonise with other countries where the lawmakers are not yet completely coopted by large corporate special interests. But that's because most of said special interests call the USA their home. If it were somewhere else, things would still be heading this way, but with a different nation "leading the way".
I believe it's been mentioned on /. before, but those who haven't read it should read Joel Bakan's "The Corporation". It's a very interesting read, and it will certainly open your eyes as to why this sort of thing is happening more and more. Unfortunately, Prof. Bakan hasn't come up with any suggestions as to how to deal with it that I can see working right now...
Yup, that's right. You're amazing!
Yeah, but at least that was farily clever and innovative at the time...
OMG!
What the hell next...?
No, that would be Ericsson. Sony-Ericsson is a handset business only. Infrastructure is built by Ericsson.
And yes, I did leave NTT off the list. They were pivotal in the Japanse acceptance of WCDMA, but were not the driving force behind the standard itself. They have done a lot in carrier-grade linux and integrating that into their network also.
You could also say the same for NSW (my home state, I'm an Aussie) and Victoria. Nevertheless, all four carriers in Australia cover the whole country!
As a matter of fact it is; the WCDMA standards were driven out of Europe just like GSM.
In fact, the Release 99 3G network is a GSM/GPRS core network with a 3G radio access layer. In the next release, R4, the core begins to diverge from classical GSM. By the time you get to R6 almost everything is completely virtualised, with full separation between control and switching layers.
Anyway, while Japan and Korea are early adopters (Japan in particular), it's the same crew supplying the gear - Nokia, Ericsson, Siemens, Nortel. There is some NEC stuff in there too IIRC but mainly packet core (SGSN, GGSN).
While that's true, the difference is that in Korea and Japan there were a few large companies that spanned large regions or the whole country. And where the companies were regional, roaming onto other regions was neither difficult nor expensive.
In the USA by contrast, the Bell breakup shattered your industry into a million tiny competing pieces, who all went out and made life as difficult for each other as possible. That of course was the natural conclusion of the court order, which put so much fear of personal penalites (ie, you personally could go to jail) due to anti-trust issues into the company executives.
Also worth noting that for 3G, both Korea and Japan are following the rest of the world this time round and choosing WCDMA. It's likely that the US will be as isolated in it's 3G standard(s) as it was in 2G.
I work at Vodafone NZ; we've dealt with our Japanese colleagues on a few occasions relating to 3G. They brought their phones with them. Way cool. Some of that technology is filtering down to the 2G phones being manufactuerd by the likes of Sharp also.
Interesting was the speed with which they were able to roll out 3G sites: thousands of cells per month. Unlike us their 2G system is completely incompatible with WCDMA so they had no concerns with radio or core interoperability - and thus they were able to rollout at an unheard-of speed. Kudos to Vodafone K.K. They have been remarkably successful!
The thing I hate about snoop is that it's command line switches are almost, but not quite exactly, the same as tcpdump. I get them mixed up _all_ the time. :(
... but finally my country shows some spine. He should be prosecuted in Australia, under Australian law. If the department of public prosecutions has seen fit not to charge him, then it either means that a) they don't think there's a case, or b) they're out chasing murderers like they should be.
No offence intended to my American colleagues, but please respect everyone else's borders!
Wow, you'd think someone would have come up with that already... But wait, I think they did - it's called "Bluetooth".
Apart from the higher bandwidth I don't see anything in this article that isn't already possible with Bluetooth. And if you _really_ need higher bandwidth then there's 802.11.
Other than the "not invented here" factor, I can't imagine why Intel wants to invent aome new standard to do the same job as an existing one. Especially since that other one has taken 5 years to start catching on, and is now getting pretty popular. How long would it take for this one to do the same?
... According to the article.
Occam's Razor says that this means 6 out of 10 movies are crap, not that 90% of people are thieves.
- it's not really designed to. Sure, the big organised crime gangs will get around it with no problems at all. But it will stop the casual counterfeiter. This is what it is designed to do.
The problem of course is that _sometimes_ it gets in the way of legitimate uses of digital technology. This is an example of one idiot ruining it for everyone. Life's like that. I pay high car insurance premiums because other people are stupid/lazy/drunk/asleep, even though I'm not.
Yeah, it's annoying, but that's life. It would just be nice if the companies would be more up-front about it. Good on Adobe for coming clean; but they needn't have denied it in the first place!
So again - if I just link against a library - even the XFree86 libraries - I'm _not_ writing a derived work. Thus this worry over license incompatibilities for derived works is a moot point.
Oops, I almost forgot:
:)
(TM) This post incldues "IP" from Hayes, Inc, Netcomm Pty Ltd, The SCO Group, Microsoft, Jane Austin, George W. Bush, Tim Burton, Dave Brubeck, Anna Kournikova and Batman.
Thanks for reminding me!
Perhaps that is the problem: the definition of a derivative. There must be a point at which you can say your work is not a derivative just because it uses a library call.
Parallels here with SCO vs. IBM - what is, or is not, a derivative? I would not think a program that used printf was a derivative of glibc any more than a novel which used the word "happiness" was a derivative of the Concise Oxford English Dictionary. However, as Linus has pointed out, a device driver probably qualifies, as you cannot write a device driver without intricately tieing it to the underlying OS.