Apparently posting just a URL is considered "lame" despite the fact that nothing else is necessary, so I'll state the obvious: the URL below points to the DAKOTA copyright.
"If this source was created by Sandia Labs, isn't it the public property of the citizens of the United States of America?"
No. The copyright belongs to the US Government if the work was created by government employees on government time, or whoever the contract says it does if it was created by a contractor.
"Does the GPL limit it to usage by citizens of the USA or did they just give away public property?"
As opposed to, for example, selling it to Autodesk so that they can suppress it to prevent it from interfering with their "business model"?
Or do you figure that Linus should have released Linux under a "free only to Finns" license?
I just had a discussion with Mr. Eldred about this. He does seem to understand the GPL and intend DAKOTA to be licensed under it. He's just a little careless with his terminology.
If some "hacker" put something like this up on his Web site he'd likely soon find himself if Federal prison. So who'll be the first to file a "cybercrime" complaint against these jerks?
"Well... It could be done now, if there were, perhaps 5 million dollars available to bankroll it."
No need for a bankroll. The cost of a lawsuit is in the lawyers' time, and class-action suits are usually done on a contingency basis. The lawyers work for a (large) share of the spoils.
Are you not aware that effective software DRM has been proven to be mathematically impossible? Only hardware schemes will be implemented, and the API's will probably only be available under NDA.
"Isn't campaign finance reform going to fix this?"
In this case it will make things worse. Intel et al will be hampered in there opposition by the financial limitations but the MPAA and the RIAA can line up all the celebrity endorsements and "benefit" concerts they want.
I wonder if there is any possibility of bringing a class-action suit for malicious prosecution against Scientology? The class would be everyone they have sued or threatened to sue. Must be thousands by now.
"There's a little war going on in your computer..."
No there isn't. There is no proprietary software on my computer.
Don't Get Mad, Get Even
on
Megapnosaurus?
·
· Score: 3, Funny
The dinosaur people should rename one of Ivie's species "little dead bug".
The beetle people are burning up the namespace. They should be required to name their critters with GUID's.
Or maybe the scientific community needs to reconsider the idea of globally unique species names. Who would be confused by a beetle and a dinosaur having the same species name?
Re:Look at Copyright, Not the GPL
on
Abusing the GPL?
·
· Score: 1
"I've had my GPLed code hijacked. All the algorithms, are the same. Many of the functions are nearly identical."
Citation, please?
Copyright does not protect algorithms and re-implemetation is not infringement. He's talking about automated obfuscation. There's no way that's going to work.
"Go to the page, look around, find another interesting link, go to that page, maybe go back one and link away again..."
I rarely do anything remotely resembling that. My usual routine is: go to a link, find nothing interesting, go back to Google, and repeat until I either find what I want or give up and reformulate my search. It is rare that a page that does not have what I want has links that seem likely to.
This won't work for the same reason that compiling a GPL'd program does not allow you ignore the GPL when distributing the resulting binary.
A work created by replacing all the identifiers in someone's copyrighted source is just as much a derivative as would be a work created by taking someone's novel and changing all the character and place names.
Tell your CEO to fire that lawyer. He's going to get you into a lot of trouble.
Slashdot Mirror
And something else ate the URL. I'll try again:
http://www.sandia.gov/dis.htm#copyright
Apparently posting just a URL is considered "lame" despite the fact that nothing else is necessary, so I'll state the obvious: the URL below points to the DAKOTA copyright.
'"No. The copyright belongs to the US Government...". But that's the people.'
ROFL.
'I really suspect that the government has broken the law here...'
You're wrong.
"If this source was created by Sandia Labs, isn't it the public property of the citizens of the United States of America?"
No. The copyright belongs to the US Government if the work was created by government employees on government time, or whoever the contract says it does if it was created by a contractor.
"Does the GPL limit it to usage by citizens of the USA or did they just give away public property?"
As opposed to, for example, selling it to Autodesk so that they can suppress it to prevent it from interfering with their "business model"?
Or do you figure that Linus should have released Linux under a "free only to Finns" license?
I just had a discussion with Mr. Eldred about this.
He does seem to understand the GPL and intend DAKOTA to be licensed under it. He's just a little careless with his terminology.
'"The only restriction is that people cannot take the DAKOTA software, change it, and then sell it," Eldred says.'
If it is under the GPL they most certainly can. They are merely required to license their version to their customers under the GPL.
"What the hell does that have to do with Congress? Are they now in the business of deciding what business models are viable or not?"
Yes. They've been in that business for more than a century, and they are getting deeper into it every day. They call it 'regulation'.
If some "hacker" put something like this up on his Web site he'd likely soon find himself if Federal prison. So who'll be the first to file a "cybercrime" complaint against these jerks?
"My question to Slashdot readers is, what software and services should ISPs distribute and support?"
The only service I want from an ISP is fast, reliable transport for my packets. Any software you send me will go in the trash unopened.
"Well... It could be done now, if there were, perhaps 5 million dollars available to bankroll it."
No need for a bankroll. The cost of a lawsuit is in the lawyers' time, and class-action suits are usually done on a contingency basis. The lawyers work for a (large) share of the spoils.
"Boy oh boy, sometimes I'm glad the Democrats do not control both houses of Congress."
There is a substantial risk that they will after the election this fall.
Are you not aware that effective software DRM has been proven to be mathematically impossible? Only hardware schemes will be implemented, and the API's will probably only be available under NDA.
"Isn't campaign finance reform going to fix this?"
In this case it will make things worse. Intel et al will be hampered in there opposition by the financial limitations but the MPAA and the RIAA can line up all the celebrity endorsements and "benefit" concerts they want.
I wonder if there is any possibility of bringing a class-action suit for malicious prosecution against Scientology? The class would be everyone they have sued or threatened to sue. Must be thousands by now.
"Sure you're kinda forced to use their OS,..."
Nonsense. I have no Microsoft software and do not miss it at all.
"Why is it that we need to go to Germany to get software to protect our freedom of speech?"
Because you aren't clever enough to type 'apt-get install gnupg', I suppose.
Gnu Privacy Guard is readily available in the USA.
"So whether or not they thought of it on their own, they had in fact thought of it by then."
It doesn't matter when they thought of it. You don't have a trademark until ship product.
"There's a little war going on in your computer..."
No there isn't. There is no proprietary software on my computer.
The dinosaur people should rename one of Ivie's species "little dead bug".
The beetle people are burning up the namespace. They should be required to name their critters with GUID's.
Or maybe the scientific community needs to reconsider the idea of globally unique species names. Who would be confused by a beetle and a dinosaur having the same species name?
Or have they removed the audio functions to make room for more memory?
How much extra would it cost me to get a cell phone that is not programmable, does not do SMS, and, if possible, has no screen?
I do not presently have a cell phone, but I have been thinking about getting one. This stuff makes me wonder if I really want one at all.
Slashdot seems to have eaten the Herbivore URL for some reason. I'll try again:
n tr o.html
http://www.vision25.demon.co.uk/oss/herbivore/i
Take a look at Herbivore.
"I've had my GPLed code hijacked. All the algorithms, are the same. Many of the functions are nearly identical."
Citation, please?
Copyright does not protect algorithms and re-implemetation is not infringement. He's talking about automated obfuscation. There's no way that's going to work.
"Go to the page, look around, find another interesting link, go to that page, maybe go back one and link away again..."
I rarely do anything remotely resembling that. My usual routine is: go to a link, find nothing interesting, go back to Google, and repeat until I either find what I want or give up and reformulate my search. It is rare that a page that does not have what I want has links that seem likely to.
This won't work for the same reason that compiling a GPL'd program does not allow you ignore the GPL when distributing the resulting binary.
A work created by replacing all the identifiers in someone's copyrighted source is just as much a derivative as would be a work created by taking someone's novel and changing all the character and place names.
Tell your CEO to fire that lawyer. He's going to get you into a lot of trouble.
IANAL