Just to summarize some of the other comments, this code was published in a programming book way back in 1974. The fact that SCO claims it was copied from them has got to be either slander or libel - please tell me this is enough to get a STFU injunction immediately!
A sysadmin once sent me a form letter type thing with my new password in it. The username/password was a spreadsheet object and I was able to open it to see everyone's passwords. He changed them all when I pointed this out. BTW, why do people send email messages that just say "see attached file" and the attached file is a memo with some trival content that could have been the text of the email??
Anyway, I have to admit that I was also burned by word. I was in the habit of opening the last memo I wrote from the recent documents list and using it as the starting point for newer ones. At some point, I put a bunch of policy statements on a CD and was later told that everyone was reading the hidden text. Doh!
This was back in the days of office 97 I believe. I'm not sure if Office 2k or XP still have this feature/bug.
In the case of the manipulation of the energy market by Enron and others it is a matter of record that there was a conspiracy. It is also a matter of record that the conspirators were the largest contributors to the Bush campaign. If you want to dispute these facts try Google, but I doubt you will even find NewsMax or Faux news trying to deny them.
So, you want me to *prove* there is no conspiracy? OK, I'll put that on my to-do list right under "prove the apollo landings are not a conspiracy"
The point is, one does not disprove a consipiracy, the proponents must make a case for one. The burden is on you - not me.
Why don't you start by explaining what constitutes manipulation of the energy market - because I have to admit ignorance here.
So far right wing conspiracies involving Bush, Cheney, Tom Delay and other Republicans have prevented the votes being counted in the presidential election,
Ok, see, when you make claims like this, you come really close to setting off my kook detector. The truth is:
1. The VNS called Florida before the polls closed in the central time zone. FYI I live in Pensacola FL and I personally know people who got off work and started driving out to the polls, turned on the radio and heard "Gore won FL" and said "fuck it, I might as well go home." The Western portion of FL where this occurred is predominately conservative. If anything, conservatives were disenfranchised/underrepresented. 2. All the votes in Florida were counted. So it is blatantly dishonest of you to say, "republicans prevented the votes being counted." Gore never once called for a full recount. Instead, he only wanted to recount votes in heavily democratic districts where he knew the vote-counters could be influenced to fudge the numbers. I don't call that fair - do you? 3. James Carvile wrote procedures for democratic lawyers to follow in florida to disqualify as many military absentee ballots as possible. He did this because he knew most military people would vote for Bush. Once again, if anything, conservative/republican voters were disenfranchised - not democrats. BTW, although I'm out of the Army right now, at the time I was serving in the 41st signal battalion in Korea. When people ask me who I voted for I say "I don't know, I tried to vote for Bush but I don't know if my vote counted." I bet you can't find a single democrat who can honestly say the same thing. 4. After all this blew over, the media (I believe is was the Miami herald) hired a law firm to recount all the votes. They found that Bush did in fact win Florida - by a wider margin. 5. Florida law states that the election must be certified by a certain date. That's the law. It doesn't leave much room for interpretation. The florida supreme court has the authority to interpret a law, or to throw it out all together. Instead, they ruled that the recounts (Gore's biased recounts) should continue. Basically, they made a new law - they said, "the new law is, you have to recount Gore's votes" The judicial branch does not have that authority. The supreme court of the US agreed. They threw out the florida supreme court ruling - and the initial vote certification stood.
So, like I said, you are wrong about Florida. It makes me wonder if you're wrong about Cali too.
so, I just want to make sure that I have my facts straight: it's all the Republicans' fault - for everything - even stuff that happened before they were in power. Californians share none of the blame here. They are helpless victims of the vast right-wing conspiracy.
You may brand me an "anti-american eurotrash fool, full of hatred" and all that,
You're definitely full of hatred, and it has obviously colored your perception of the highway-noise article and our discussion of it. I have *not* called you eurotrash or a fool however. You have used those labels several times yourself though and it's interesting to me that you evidently have deluded yourself into believing that I am calling you eurotrash. It's symptomatic in my opinion of a persecution complex. You think I am attacking you - that I am out to get you.
In fact, your strong reaction to the highway-noise article can be explained as another symptom of a persecution complex. You must have believed that by failing to cite Norwegian research, the Perdue researchers were somehow threatening you - that it was some kind of affront to your national identity.
And now that I think about it, you used the phrase "call me paranoid" even though no one, lest of all me, had actually called you paranoid. This just lends further credence to my theory. You really do believe that everyone is out to get you!
I don't think I can trust any conclusion you draw. It will always be based on the idea that you are a victim.
BTW: That's not your hospital, unless the US now owns Iraq.
As a matter of fact, the US does own Iraq. We conquered it. Remember? Whether you agree or disagree with that doesn't matter because the fact is there's really nothing you can do about it. You are absolutely powerless and your voice means nothing. That must be a terrible blow to your ego, but it's true. Furthermore, I really have to ask myself if you are capable of understanding all of the facts surrounding the war, or if your persecution complex has predisposed you to being anti-war. In other words, given that your opinion doesn't matter and is potentially biased by a preexisting persecution complex, why should I listen to anything you have to say?
Call me paraniod, but it seems to imply "researchers have been breaking their heads over this, both in Europe as well as the US, but they are not yet sure. In US (hence, "Great American Invention") we are already way ahead
I don't call you paranoid. But I think that any reasonable reader will see that you are way hypersensitive. In my opinion, the article didn't imply anything negative about any other country. In my opinion, your interpretation of the section you quoted is incorrect.
I don't know where you see any "hatred" or "flaming of people" in my post.
You came right out of the gate accusing Americans of being liars and thieves. That statement justifies my characterization of your post as a flame. You've also implied that the researchers are morons in that they cannot see the advantages of the Norwegian system (assuming there are advantages; I will not be convinced of that based on your obviously biased report). Further, you rhetorically refer to yourself as eurotrash (twice) as if to say that it is a given that an American would be too arrogant to engage you civilly. Yeah, I think that shows a little bit of overt hatred.
Your sig is irrelevant to the context of our discussion, but I'll just mention in passing that the quote you have there is in reference to allowing doctors to smoke in hospitals. Yeah, sorry, we don't allow Iraqi doctors to smoke in our hospitals. I guess that means they are being oppressed. I guess disallowing smoking rises to the same level of oppression as Sadam inflicted on them when he'd drop them into chipper-shredders. Right.
In summary, and to get back on topic, although I don't see any animosity in the article directed at your countrymen, you certainly seem to have a lot of it directed my way. It certainly seems to rise to the level of outright hatred. How much more intelligent you would have seemed if your post had been along the lines of "we have a similar system here in my country, here is a link:" but your uncontrolled anger got the best of you and you flew into a rage.
That's a pretty strong statement. But you can't support it with facts.
A similar compound was invented in the Netherlands ages ago,
That's nice. How does the compound developed in the Netherlands differ from the one developed at Perdue? If you don't know, I humbly suggest you put your flamethrower away. For all you know, Perdue's compound is better, cheaper, or works in a wider range of environmental conditions. At any rate, none of this constitutes lying or stealing.
Now some university is passing this off as a "Great American Invention"?!?!
Nowhere in the story is it referred to as a great American invention. Nonetheless, as I indicated above, it may in fact be a great American invention. It is entirely possible that the Perdue researchers set out to solve the same problem that researchers in the Netherlands set out to solve, and in fact arrived at a unique solution. All without stealing and without lying.
Can we just get to the heart of the matter: why are you so full of hatred that you fly off the handle and start flaming people after such an innocent article??
Re:Here's an Idea...
on
RIAA Quashed
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
which part of "shared directories" do you not understand?
You want to hurt the RIAA? You want to "turn it around" on them? Me too. Here's an idea: download iRATE Radio (it's on sourceforge. I'm not going to link it for you). Use the program to build a collection of free and legal mp3s. Go through the trouble of appending words like " - similar to artist XYZ" to the end of the mp3 filenames. Then share this stuff through kazaa. That way, you'll turn a few clueless people on to indie bands.
oh, and don't share copyrighted stuff. If the RIAA takes you to court for sharing free indie songs counter sue for big $$$.
It took all of 7 days fot LinuxTAG to shut up SCO in Germany, likewise in Poland and Australia.
Correct me if I'm wrong but I believe SCO did not defend itself in Europe or Australia so the courts there issued summary judgement.
Why didn't SCO defend itself? Because in thier estimate of the situation, the concluded that the outcome wasn't going to affect thier stock price back in the US. Had they defended themselves, it would have taken months to get an injunction in Germany just like it's taking months in the US.
So, this is not "an insult on the US justice system" so much as it is an insite into the strategy of SCO. This is just more evidence that they are doing a pump and dump.
I think your question gets to the "why" of existence. And although I'm not sure if this is the right interviewee to ask, I would also like to hear his thoughts on it.
I'll also add one that I think I heard Steven Hawking ask, "What is so special about the universe that it bothers to exist at all?"
The reason this is such a mystery is that the great pyramid is made of over two million blocks, each weighing two and a half tons. Our best estimates for construction time are that it took around 20 years to build. Assuming a 10 to 12 hour work day and no holidays (365 days a year) that means the ancient Egyptians placed a block every 20 to 30 seconds.
Today, even with modern equipment, we could not make that happen. Maybe we could place a block every 5 minutes or every 10 minutes, but I can't imagine we could do it under a minute continuously. It's just an amazing feet. You can see why people are so impressed.
There are so many examples of humans achieving such greatness, and accomplishing such feats, that later generations do not comprehend. I suppose our generation has the Apollo moon landings, and maybe a couple of other things. It really stands as a testament to our potential. So, when we start murdering each other wholesale I like to think about these achievements because it gives me hope that we can rise above our destructive nature.
You might use some kind of delegated authorization system that would work like a certificate chain in GPG. In other words, all your friends have keys signed by you. Your friends can bring their friends in by signing their friends' keys. If at some point you find out or suspect that the RIAA has gained access to your network, you can revoke their authorization - and everyone that they've brought in.
hopefully, this is where the RIAA's power will end. To effectively block US users from accessing file sharers in, say, Taiwan, they'd have to block the entire country. I guarantee you there are a lot of big corporations, for example banks, who would have something to say about that.
The RIAA's president was not sure what advice to offer because he never imagined downloaders could be identified until Internet providers turned over subscriber records,
I think you misread the article. The ISPs have already turned over the subscribers names. The RIAA already knows who they are going to sue. The AP found the names in *court documents* and contacted a few of the defendants. The AP did not publish the names in its story - and I think that's where you got confused.
But you're right, it's odd that the RIAA didn't already have a plan in place to settle. I suspect what they really hope to do is bog down the courts until congress enacts some new legislation, perhaps making P2P illegal alltogether, or maybe requiring ISPs to block it.
the RIAA will probably sue you anyway and you will probably lose. Thier lawyers will be better than yours and no one will believe that you were just playing a trick on them.
What really scares me is that, honestly, there is no defense that anyone will believe. The RIAA could just pick someone at random - someone who never shared any music at all - and present a made up dir list to the court. The person will say "hey, you've made a mistake!" and the judge will say "do you expect me to believe that?" and that'll be the end of you.
That's just one of the many sides to the slippery slope we're on when we insist on making ideas ownable.
that would not stop Microsoft from shipping it. They'd just have to make copies of the source available too, and GPL any improvements they made to it.
you call me perposterous then you back up my point. If MS had to GPL improvements they made to Windows, it would effectively prevent them from shipping it because they would have a hard time charging for something that can be had for free.
But even if SCO wins a settlement from IBM, just like Sears and Paramount, the users of the 'tainted' product will not have to pay a single penny.
I have a hypothetical question for you.
Suppose I set up a small corporation and take out a loan for the amount Microsoft charges to see the Windows source code. I know they wont show all of it to me, but I believe that for a couple hundred thousand dollars and an NDA they will show me something.
Now suppose I release that code under the GPL.
Not so fast! Shouts MS. We are going to sue you. Fine, I say. I have no money anyway. This was all a ploy to get your code. My corporation, which I never really cared about anyway, is sued into oblivion.
By your logic however, the code stays under the GPL. That would probably mean that MS could not use it (their own code mind you) in the next version of Windows.
Does that sound plausible? If not, I think you need to revise your theory.
How can Intuit survive Microsoft and not these other companies?
Is it because Microsoft isn't trying? Just wait until they start putting Microsoft Money into Office - or maybe including it with Windows. Intuit will be gone in no time flat. If people already have MS Money do you think they'll go out and buy Quicken? Even if Quicken is better? I don't think they will. It's sad but it's true. This is how MS competes.
The only way to beat MS is to give your software away for free or establish a niche market that MS doesn't care about.
I have a web server running a copy of Linux that I downloaded from SCO. SCO allowed me to download it -the whole thing - under the GPL. By demanding payment now, they are violating that licence.
2. Use more draconian law enforment techniques. Posibble but I mean whata ya gonna do... start sending colleage kids to prison ? For what stealing a Brittney track ? Is this what we want ?
no. it's not what we want. But when has that ever stopped the government from passing a draconian law?
Drug laws, for all thier good intentions definitely fall into this category.
Slashdot Mirror
Just to summarize some of the other comments, this code was published in a programming book way back in 1974. The fact that SCO claims it was copied from them has got to be either slander or libel - please tell me this is enough to get a STFU injunction immediately!
A sysadmin once sent me a form letter type thing with my new password in it. The username/password was a spreadsheet object and I was able to open it to see everyone's passwords. He changed them all when I pointed this out. BTW, why do people send email messages that just say "see attached file" and the attached file is a memo with some trival content that could have been the text of the email??
Anyway, I have to admit that I was also burned by word. I was in the habit of opening the last memo I wrote from the recent documents list and using it as the starting point for newer ones. At some point, I put a bunch of policy statements on a CD and was later told that everyone was reading the hidden text. Doh!
This was back in the days of office 97 I believe. I'm not sure if Office 2k or XP still have this feature/bug.
In the case of the manipulation of the energy market by Enron and others it is a matter of record that there was a conspiracy. It is also a matter of record that the conspirators were the largest contributors to the Bush campaign. If you want to dispute these facts try Google, but I doubt you will even find NewsMax or Faux news trying to deny them.
So, you want me to *prove* there is no conspiracy? OK, I'll put that on my to-do list right under "prove the apollo landings are not a conspiracy"
The point is, one does not disprove a consipiracy, the proponents must make a case for one. The burden is on you - not me.
Why don't you start by explaining what constitutes manipulation of the energy market - because I have to admit ignorance here.
So far right wing conspiracies involving Bush, Cheney, Tom Delay and other Republicans have prevented the votes being counted in the presidential election,
Ok, see, when you make claims like this, you come really close to setting off my kook detector. The truth is:
1. The VNS called Florida before the polls closed in the central time zone. FYI I live in Pensacola FL and I personally know people who got off work and started driving out to the polls, turned on the radio and heard "Gore won FL" and said "fuck it, I might as well go home." The Western portion of FL where this occurred is predominately conservative. If anything, conservatives were disenfranchised/underrepresented.
2. All the votes in Florida were counted. So it is blatantly dishonest of you to say, "republicans prevented the votes being counted." Gore never once called for a full recount. Instead, he only wanted to recount votes in heavily democratic districts where he knew the vote-counters could be influenced to fudge the numbers. I don't call that fair - do you?
3. James Carvile wrote procedures for democratic lawyers to follow in florida to disqualify as many military absentee ballots as possible. He did this because he knew most military people would vote for Bush. Once again, if anything, conservative/republican voters were disenfranchised - not democrats. BTW, although I'm out of the Army right now, at the time I was serving in the 41st signal battalion in Korea. When people ask me who I voted for I say "I don't know, I tried to vote for Bush but I don't know if my vote counted." I bet you can't find a single democrat who can honestly say the same thing.
4. After all this blew over, the media (I believe is was the Miami herald) hired a law firm to recount all the votes. They found that Bush did in fact win Florida - by a wider margin.
5. Florida law states that the election must be certified by a certain date. That's the law. It doesn't leave much room for interpretation. The florida supreme court has the authority to interpret a law, or to throw it out all together. Instead, they ruled that the recounts (Gore's biased recounts) should continue. Basically, they made a new law - they said, "the new law is, you have to recount Gore's votes" The judicial branch does not have that authority. The supreme court of the US agreed. They threw out the florida supreme court ruling - and the initial vote certification stood.
So, like I said, you are wrong about Florida. It makes me wonder if you're wrong about Cali too.
so, I just want to make sure that I have my facts straight: it's all the Republicans' fault - for everything - even stuff that happened before they were in power. Californians share none of the blame here. They are helpless victims of the vast right-wing conspiracy.
Does that pretty much sum it up?
Great. Please provide a source.
You may brand me an "anti-american eurotrash fool, full of hatred" and all that,
You're definitely full of hatred, and it has obviously colored your perception of the highway-noise article and our discussion of it. I have *not* called you eurotrash or a fool however. You have used those labels several times yourself though and it's interesting to me that you evidently have deluded yourself into believing that I am calling you eurotrash. It's symptomatic in my opinion of a persecution complex. You think I am attacking you - that I am out to get you.
In fact, your strong reaction to the highway-noise article can be explained as another symptom of a persecution complex. You must have believed that by failing to cite Norwegian research, the Perdue researchers were somehow threatening you - that it was some kind of affront to your national identity.
And now that I think about it, you used the phrase "call me paranoid" even though no one, lest of all me, had actually called you paranoid. This just lends further credence to my theory. You really do believe that everyone is out to get you!
I don't think I can trust any conclusion you draw. It will always be based on the idea that you are a victim.
BTW:
That's not your hospital, unless the US now owns Iraq.
As a matter of fact, the US does own Iraq. We conquered it. Remember? Whether you agree or disagree with that doesn't matter because the fact is there's really nothing you can do about it. You are absolutely powerless and your voice means nothing. That must be a terrible blow to your ego, but it's true. Furthermore, I really have to ask myself if you are capable of understanding all of the facts surrounding the war, or if your persecution complex has predisposed you to being anti-war. In other words, given that your opinion doesn't matter and is potentially biased by a preexisting persecution complex, why should I listen to anything you have to say?
Call me paraniod, but it seems to imply "researchers have been breaking their heads over this, both in Europe as well as the US, but they are not yet sure. In US (hence, "Great American Invention") we are already way ahead
I don't call you paranoid. But I think that any reasonable reader will see that you are way hypersensitive. In my opinion, the article didn't imply anything negative about any other country. In my opinion, your interpretation of the section you quoted is incorrect.
I don't know where you see any "hatred" or "flaming of people" in my post.
You came right out of the gate accusing Americans of being liars and thieves. That statement justifies my characterization of your post as a flame. You've also implied that the researchers are morons in that they cannot see the advantages of the Norwegian system (assuming there are advantages; I will not be convinced of that based on your obviously biased report). Further, you rhetorically refer to yourself as eurotrash (twice) as if to say that it is a given that an American would be too arrogant to engage you civilly. Yeah, I think that shows a little bit of overt hatred.
Your sig is irrelevant to the context of our discussion, but I'll just mention in passing that the quote you have there is in reference to allowing doctors to smoke in hospitals. Yeah, sorry, we don't allow Iraqi doctors to smoke in our hospitals. I guess that means they are being oppressed. I guess disallowing smoking rises to the same level of oppression as Sadam inflicted on them when he'd drop them into chipper-shredders. Right.
In summary, and to get back on topic, although I don't see any animosity in the article directed at your countrymen, you certainly seem to have a lot of it directed my way. It certainly seems to rise to the level of outright hatred. How much more intelligent you would have seemed if your post had been along the lines of "we have a similar system here in my country, here is a link:" but your uncontrolled anger got the best of you and you flew into a rage.
Too bad for you.
liars and thieves
That's a pretty strong statement. But you can't support it with facts.
A similar compound was invented in the Netherlands ages ago,
That's nice. How does the compound developed in the Netherlands differ from the one developed at Perdue? If you don't know, I humbly suggest you put your flamethrower away. For all you know, Perdue's compound is better, cheaper, or works in a wider range of environmental conditions. At any rate, none of this constitutes lying or stealing.
Now some university is passing this off as a "Great American Invention"?!?!
Nowhere in the story is it referred to as a great American invention. Nonetheless, as I indicated above, it may in fact be a great American invention. It is entirely possible that the Perdue researchers set out to solve the same problem that researchers in the Netherlands set out to solve, and in fact arrived at a unique solution. All without stealing and without lying.
Can we just get to the heart of the matter: why are you so full of hatred that you fly off the handle and start flaming people after such an innocent article??
which part of "shared directories" do you not understand?
You want to hurt the RIAA? You want to "turn it around" on them? Me too. Here's an idea: download iRATE Radio (it's on sourceforge. I'm not going to link it for you). Use the program to build a collection of free and legal mp3s. Go through the trouble of appending words like " - similar to artist XYZ" to the end of the mp3 filenames. Then share this stuff through kazaa. That way, you'll turn a few clueless people on to indie bands.
oh, and don't share copyrighted stuff. If the RIAA takes you to court for sharing free indie songs counter sue for big $$$.
It took all of 7 days fot LinuxTAG to shut up SCO in Germany, likewise in Poland and Australia.
Correct me if I'm wrong but I believe SCO did not defend itself in Europe or Australia so the courts there issued summary judgement.
Why didn't SCO defend itself? Because in thier estimate of the situation, the concluded that the outcome wasn't going to affect thier stock price back in the US. Had they defended themselves, it would have taken months to get an injunction in Germany just like it's taking months in the US.
So, this is not "an insult on the US justice system" so much as it is an insite into the strategy of SCO. This is just more evidence that they are doing a pump and dump.
I think your question gets to the "why" of existence. And although I'm not sure if this is the right interviewee to ask, I would also like to hear his thoughts on it.
I'll also add one that I think I heard Steven Hawking ask, "What is so special about the universe that it bothers to exist at all?"
and then forget about it forever.
kind of like dropping a key in a drawer and forgetting about it - only the house knows where it is all along...
how's that for an obscure book reference?
The reason this is such a mystery is that the great pyramid is made of over two million blocks, each weighing two and a half tons. Our best estimates for construction time are that it took around 20 years to build. Assuming a 10 to 12 hour work day and no holidays (365 days a year) that means the ancient Egyptians placed a block every 20 to 30 seconds.
Today, even with modern equipment, we could not make that happen. Maybe we could place a block every 5 minutes or every 10 minutes, but I can't imagine we could do it under a minute continuously. It's just an amazing feet. You can see why people are so impressed.
There are so many examples of humans achieving such greatness, and accomplishing such feats, that later generations do not comprehend. I suppose our generation has the Apollo moon landings, and maybe a couple of other things. It really stands as a testament to our potential. So, when we start murdering each other wholesale I like to think about these achievements because it gives me hope that we can rise above our destructive nature.
Of course you have to trust your friends...
You might use some kind of delegated authorization system that would work like a certificate chain in GPG. In other words, all your friends have keys signed by you. Your friends can bring their friends in by signing their friends' keys. If at some point you find out or suspect that the RIAA has gained access to your network, you can revoke their authorization - and everyone that they've brought in.
Might work.
hopefully, this is where the RIAA's power will end. To effectively block US users from accessing file sharers in, say, Taiwan, they'd have to block the entire country. I guarantee you there are a lot of big corporations, for example banks, who would have something to say about that.
The RIAA's president was not sure what advice to offer because he never imagined downloaders could be identified until Internet providers turned over subscriber records,
I think you misread the article. The ISPs have already turned over the subscribers names. The RIAA already knows who they are going to sue. The AP found the names in *court documents* and contacted a few of the defendants. The AP did not publish the names in its story - and I think that's where you got confused.
But you're right, it's odd that the RIAA didn't already have a plan in place to settle. I suspect what they really hope to do is bog down the courts until congress enacts some new legislation, perhaps making P2P illegal alltogether, or maybe requiring ISPs to block it.
the RIAA will probably sue you anyway and you will probably lose. Thier lawyers will be better than yours and no one will believe that you were just playing a trick on them.
What really scares me is that, honestly, there is no defense that anyone will believe. The RIAA could just pick someone at random - someone who never shared any music at all - and present a made up dir list to the court. The person will say "hey, you've made a mistake!" and the judge will say "do you expect me to believe that?" and that'll be the end of you.
That's just one of the many sides to the slippery slope we're on when we insist on making ideas ownable.
that would not stop Microsoft from shipping it. They'd just have to make copies of the source available too, and GPL any improvements they made to it.
you call me perposterous then you back up my point. If MS had to GPL improvements they made to Windows, it would effectively prevent them from shipping it because they would have a hard time charging for something that can be had for free.
But even if SCO wins a settlement from IBM, just like Sears and Paramount, the users of the 'tainted' product will not have to pay a single penny.
I have a hypothetical question for you.
Suppose I set up a small corporation and take out a loan for the amount Microsoft charges to see the Windows source code. I know they wont show all of it to me, but I believe that for a couple hundred thousand dollars and an NDA they will show me something.
Now suppose I release that code under the GPL.
Not so fast! Shouts MS. We are going to sue you. Fine, I say. I have no money anyway. This was all a ploy to get your code. My corporation, which I never really cared about anyway, is sued into oblivion.
By your logic however, the code stays under the GPL. That would probably mean that MS could not use it (their own code mind you) in the next version of Windows.
Does that sound plausible? If not, I think you need to revise your theory.
including RCU does not make Linux a derivate of SVR4
To put that in laymens terms: Putting a Type-R sticker on your Dodge Neon does not give Acura ownership of it.
How can Intuit survive Microsoft and not these other companies?
Is it because Microsoft isn't trying? Just wait until they start putting Microsoft Money into Office - or maybe including it with Windows. Intuit will be gone in no time flat. If people already have MS Money do you think they'll go out and buy Quicken? Even if Quicken is better? I don't think they will. It's sad but it's true. This is how MS competes.
The only way to beat MS is to give your software away for free or establish a niche market that MS doesn't care about.
See this comment:8 6&cid=6491 716
. html
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=718
Which links to this story:
http://biz.yahoo.com/rc/030721/tech_sco_4
in which IBM says the claims are baseless.
I have a web server running a copy of Linux that I downloaded from SCO. SCO allowed me to download it -the whole thing - under the GPL. By demanding payment now, they are violating that licence.
AREN'T there better uses of time, like gee, protecting our borders?
I agree. DirectTV should get back to protecting our boarders!
2. Use more draconian law enforment techniques. Posibble but I mean whata ya gonna do... start sending colleage kids to prison ? For what stealing a Brittney track ? Is this what we want ?
no. it's not what we want. But when has that ever stopped the government from passing a draconian law?
Drug laws, for all thier good intentions definitely fall into this category.
Of course, I'm not a cynic who condemns all things military because they are military.
That was my thought exactly when I read his comment. That, and the thought that he is a loser.
What unit are you in?