database, dossier, file, list... anything would have been more accurate than "facebook". Hell, even if they compared it to Wikipedia, it would have been more accurate.
Facebook is full of user supplied information. The others are collections of information by 3rd parties. Maybe they were hoping for the keyword "facebook" to get their story more traffic. It got them here, so that should be good for at least a couple dozen clicks. That's the number of daily Slashdot users now, right?
I've had a number of nice conversations with attorneys over the years. They range from specific real cases and current news events, to totally hypothetical events. Frequently, you'll hear "it depends on the judge". Different judges have different opinions. One may side with you totally, while another will be annoyed that you even attempt to reference a particular thing. That's the biggest thing a local attorney who knows the judge will give you.
In his case, one judge may like that he had no intention of violating the IP of the other. Another may prefer to hear that the violation was coincidental. And a third may not care and put him on the hook for a stack of damages.
Asking for legal help here and expecting an answer that can be used is totally different. An attorney doesn't have all the facts, doesn't know the jurisdiction, and would open themselves up to legal trouble.
If the advice is valid in the attorney's jurisdiction, but not the OP, he could come back and blame the attorney.
If the attorney is giving advice outside of the area where he is licensed, he can run into trouble.
If there's something significant that changes the case, then he gave bad advice.
And just like the aforementioned car analogy, a mechanic online can't give the answer to "what is that noise". That thump may be a flat tire, the bass is turned up too loud, or any number of things.
It all depends on what the "common English word" is. Apple. Blackberry. Chase. Delta. EvilCorp. Fire.... You get the idea. (I couldn't resist EvilCorp. Sorry).
Even if he was explicitly clear, there are a few points.
1) None of us are attorneys specializing in trademark law.
2) Even if there are such attorneys here, they would say "But I'm not your attorney until you retain me, so I cannot answer."
3) If the guy is just asking for a word from the description to be removed, fuck it, remove the word. He doesn't have the funds to fight it. When he has the money to pay an attorney to deal with the USPTO, Google and the opposing party, that's when he has something to work with. If it's as weak as he implies, he could potentially get the trademark invalidated and then sue for damages from lost revenue by complying (but not admitting guilt) with the initial C&D in a timely and good faith manner.
That actual trademark attorney may just say at the initial consultation, "This isn't worth my time. File form xyz yourself with the USPTO to get it invalidated, and then go back to Google with it." I've heard lawyers say that plenty of times, when there isn't enough money to be had.
They may even direct him to a group like EFF or ACLU, who would take it on principle, or even another attorney who is already defending other targets of this troll.
As not an attorney, nothing above is to be considered advice of any sort. What follows is.
Contact an attorney. Get the free or few hundred dollar consult.
You know, you can just put Classic Shell on, and it looks and behaves almost identically to Win7. The only significant change I see in 8.1 once you get out of Metro is the task manager is a bit better.
I know that making one change is a significant hardship to most people. It's probably not as hard as explaining why they can't run Windows programs. Or at least trying to explain why particular programs don't work under Wine.
I have outstanding submissions anywhere from 6 months to a year right now. I just got one denied that was just over 6 months old.
Of course, they'll take graffiti on the side of a dumpster, but they won't take actual non-death-camp historic landmarks.
As I keep saying, their approval process is handled by a randomizer. No human can be as pathetic as their approve/deny decisions have been.
Hell, I tried to have a portal removed from my ex-wife's house. I went out to visit our daughter, and while I was trying to explain the game, I turned on the game and it was on the house. The picture was from a commercial property miles away. They refused to remove it.
He lost because he didn't bother to respond to the charges.. I couldn't read the text of the complaint (they want money), but the article says he's been ignoring them for several years over these "performances".
I don't agree with the price tag, but it looks like he was fudging the truth to get free advertising out of this lawsuit.
You're actually just mad at the kernel that came with your distro. That's easily fixed, and instructions are abundant. Really, I spot checked and there is 35 year old hardware still supported, you just have to know what you're doing. If you're installing Linux on obscure hardware, you should already know how to do this.
I just grabbed the Linux 3.4.107 kernel (from kernel.org), which is still being supported. 3.6 dropped i386 support, so I'm going for the full support argument here.:)
I did this on a x64, so I needed to export the correct arch.
$ export ARCH=i386 ; make menuconfig
Processor type and features -> Processor family -> [386]
Bus options -> ISA support -> [checked] Bus options -> PCI support -> [unchecked] Bus options -> PCCard (PCMCIA/CardBus) support -> [unchecked]
Networking support -> Networking options -> [whatever other/old network types you want]... IPX, Appletalk, CCITT x.25
Now you can support any antique ISA card on a i386 you want.
Device Drivers -> Network device support -> Ethernet driver support ->
All the old ISA cards that I can think of are supported. Here's a screen shot of the make config for network card drivers only, with just what I put above. I set them all to build, to expand out everything. In practice, only build the one you're using, and/or make modules so you can load them rather than building them.
I'm also not sure why you'd want to run gcc3 on a 15 year old piece of hardware,
That was the question of the original post. Except don't do it on 15 year old hardware, do it on something circa 1990. So something base don a 80386SX, Z80, 65C02, or 68000.
He doesn't realize that in 2017, the FUture Widget FUx5000 will be released, and in the following 3 years will become the dominant platform.
Make sure it's it's not compatible with any current technology or formats. Maybe you can write it all in Java. We all love Java running on our servers. Maybe with a non-intuitive touch screen console with no real functionality. You'll make a fortune.:)
Actually, the WTC would be a strategic military target. It could easily been included in infrastructure. There was a lot that happened through that building, therefore it was a valid target. It wasn't the best target, but it was a target.
The thing is, the group who attacked the WTC weren't a military. They weren't even paramiltiary. All things indicate a handful of people with boxcutters. There are better organized paramilitary organizations operating within the US daily that carry out widespread crime. They just go under reported because they aren't as important in the eyes of the casual news viewer as a couple big buildings and a bunch of people in suits in a one-time event.
He's the one that made the claims. He said he did it, and then went to the FBI to explain how he did it. Other than finding the tampered box lid, all the "evidence" is in his claims.
I could knock a panel loose and then claim I hacked the in-flight entertainment system and made an airplane into a sperm whale and then a potted plant. That doesn't make it real, even if I showed them a box containing an infinite improbability drive. Funny thing about that, when most people see it, they see an empty box. How improbable.
NASA already has the answer. Glitter filled Super Balls are the best thing for the job. As we all know, they are infused with magic energy. A 10kg payload traveling at 11.2 km/s could deflect an object the size of the moon.
It does have risks though. Once set in motion, the Super Balls would be set loose on the universe, potentially disrupting entire galaxies.
For the sake of the universe, I hope we never have to deploy such a weapon.
It depends on how the theoretical spaces work. You can have multiple things in the same space. Just where you're sitting, there is air, light, heat, radio waves, sound waves, gravity, probably a few neutrinos.
I just used "spaces" because I couldn't think of a more appropriate word.
That's probably the biggest reason to have good in-house security people. They don't have a financial interest to make breaches or lie about them. It's in their best interest to keep everything secure, and continue to look for new ways to attempt breaking into their own stuff.
I've never felt good about letting third parties in to do security testing. When someone above my rank decided to let a 3rd party do external tests, they'll pick anything and make it sound disastrous. One place was bitching about anything.
They complained that we had the current version of Bind running on the DNS servers. "But people can do DNS requests!" Yup.
They flagged the fact that we dropped unwanted traffic at the firewall. Yup. Get over it. They were upset it took forever to scan the network. Good.
They flagged us for having a web server providing static content. They were upset they couldn't find any way to exploit CGIs or do SQL injection. Yup. That was kind of the idea.
There were a whole bunch of other trivial things that they flagged us for. Then they were brought to the office, and got upset that we didn't provide wifi. Nope, that's a security risk. They wanted to plug their laptop into our network, so they were only given external access. Again, they bitched. But letting an unknown computer owned by an unauthorized party plug into our network is a security risk.
They eventually gave up trying to bully us into dropping our security precautions and gave us a pass.
I already habitually ran tests with privileged access to make sure even if all layers of protection failed, nothing really bad could happen.
Honestly, if they are given everything, they can find something. Give them administrative rights to everything, and credentials to everything, they can find something. Like, email accounts can be accessed with full admin rights. Funny how that works.
Yup, if it wasn't Microsoft, all kinds of other companies could have dominated the desktop market. IBM (OS/2), Quarterdeck (DESQview/X), Apple (Mac OS), NeXT (NeXT), any number of *nix companies (X11), and others.
Microsoft got big because they got the consumers interested, and questionable deals with vendors.
Plenty of people only know the tunnel-vision version of computer history and they believe Microsoft is it. They either don't remember (or are too young to have seen) software boxes (ahh, the good ol' days) had logos to indicate which OS they worked on so you could pick the right one.
Saying "We're sure he had..." without evidence is not evidence. They have to have the evidence that he actually *did* have what is claimed.
That's the hard part. They have to gather the evidence to get the conviction. Without evidence, they can't get a conviction. At least if you have a competent attorney. If you have a crappy one, you'll get the 5 years because they talked you into taking a pre-trial plea agreement. That's how innocent people go to jail.
Slashdot Mirror
database, dossier, file, list... anything would have been more accurate than "facebook". Hell, even if they compared it to Wikipedia, it would have been more accurate.
Facebook is full of user supplied information. The others are collections of information by 3rd parties. Maybe they were hoping for the keyword "facebook" to get their story more traffic. It got them here, so that should be good for at least a couple dozen clicks. That's the number of daily Slashdot users now, right?
That's going to work just as well as warranties.
"Oh my gosh, I can't void the warranty!"
"Oh my gosh, The FCC doesn't want me doing that!"
I wish them the best.
From Patrick himself...
http://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/slackware-14/lilo-developer-stepping-down-ending-the-project-4175552274/#post5413967
"As long as it works, we'll include it."
I've always preferred LILO over Grub. It's simplicity has always been great.
I believe this was covered in the documentary.
I've had a number of nice conversations with attorneys over the years. They range from specific real cases and current news events, to totally hypothetical events. Frequently, you'll hear "it depends on the judge". Different judges have different opinions. One may side with you totally, while another will be annoyed that you even attempt to reference a particular thing. That's the biggest thing a local attorney who knows the judge will give you.
In his case, one judge may like that he had no intention of violating the IP of the other. Another may prefer to hear that the violation was coincidental. And a third may not care and put him on the hook for a stack of damages.
Asking for legal help here and expecting an answer that can be used is totally different. An attorney doesn't have all the facts, doesn't know the jurisdiction, and would open themselves up to legal trouble.
If the advice is valid in the attorney's jurisdiction, but not the OP, he could come back and blame the attorney.
If the attorney is giving advice outside of the area where he is licensed, he can run into trouble.
If there's something significant that changes the case, then he gave bad advice.
And just like the aforementioned car analogy, a mechanic online can't give the answer to "what is that noise". That thump may be a flat tire, the bass is turned up too loud, or any number of things.
If not, he can ask Bill Cosby for advice.
It all depends on what the "common English word" is. Apple. Blackberry. Chase. Delta. EvilCorp. Fire. ... You get the idea. (I couldn't resist EvilCorp. Sorry).
Even if he was explicitly clear, there are a few points.
1) None of us are attorneys specializing in trademark law.
2) Even if there are such attorneys here, they would say "But I'm not your attorney until you retain me, so I cannot answer."
3) If the guy is just asking for a word from the description to be removed, fuck it, remove the word. He doesn't have the funds to fight it. When he has the money to pay an attorney to deal with the USPTO, Google and the opposing party, that's when he has something to work with. If it's as weak as he implies, he could potentially get the trademark invalidated and then sue for damages from lost revenue by complying (but not admitting guilt) with the initial C&D in a timely and good faith manner.
That actual trademark attorney may just say at the initial consultation, "This isn't worth my time. File form xyz yourself with the USPTO to get it invalidated, and then go back to Google with it." I've heard lawyers say that plenty of times, when there isn't enough money to be had.
They may even direct him to a group like EFF or ACLU, who would take it on principle, or even another attorney who is already defending other targets of this troll.
As not an attorney, nothing above is to be considered advice of any sort. What follows is.
Contact an attorney. Get the free or few hundred dollar consult.
You know, you can just put Classic Shell on, and it looks and behaves almost identically to Win7. The only significant change I see in 8.1 once you get out of Metro is the task manager is a bit better.
I know that making one change is a significant hardship to most people. It's probably not as hard as explaining why they can't run Windows programs. Or at least trying to explain why particular programs don't work under Wine.
Good corporate management types can spew that stuff on demand. Pacify the angry mobs, and don't promise anything. Hell, that's most of their job.
I'm pretty sure that was a high altitude joke sailing by at mach 1.
I have outstanding submissions anywhere from 6 months to a year right now. I just got one denied that was just over 6 months old.
Of course, they'll take graffiti on the side of a dumpster, but they won't take actual non-death-camp historic landmarks.
As I keep saying, their approval process is handled by a randomizer. No human can be as pathetic as their approve/deny decisions have been.
Hell, I tried to have a portal removed from my ex-wife's house. I went out to visit our daughter, and while I was trying to explain the game, I turned on the game and it was on the house. The picture was from a commercial property miles away. They refused to remove it.
He lost because he didn't bother to respond to the charges.. I couldn't read the text of the complaint (they want money), but the article says he's been ignoring them for several years over these "performances".
I don't agree with the price tag, but it looks like he was fudging the truth to get free advertising out of this lawsuit.
You're actually just mad at the kernel that came with your distro. That's easily fixed, and instructions are abundant. Really, I spot checked and there is 35 year old hardware still supported, you just have to know what you're doing. If you're installing Linux on obscure hardware, you should already know how to do this.
I just grabbed the Linux 3.4.107 kernel (from kernel.org), which is still being supported. 3.6 dropped i386 support, so I'm going for the full support argument here. :)
I did this on a x64, so I needed to export the correct arch.
$ export ARCH=i386 ; make menuconfig
Now you can support any antique ISA card on a i386 you want.
All the old ISA cards that I can think of are supported. Here's a screen shot of the make config for network card drivers only, with just what I put above. I set them all to build, to expand out everything. In practice, only build the one you're using, and/or make modules so you can load them rather than building them.
http://imgur.com/QVnIN5u
That was the question of the original post. Except don't do it on 15 year old hardware, do it on something circa 1990. So something base don a 80386SX, Z80, 65C02, or 68000.
He doesn't realize that in 2017, the FUture Widget FUx5000 will be released, and in the following 3 years will become the dominant platform.
It's not like a major processor manufacturer hasn't tried this recently.
Make sure it's it's not compatible with any current technology or formats. :)
Maybe you can write it all in Java. We all love Java running on our servers. Maybe with a non-intuitive touch screen console with no real functionality. You'll make a fortune.
Actually, the WTC would be a strategic military target. It could easily been included in infrastructure. There was a lot that happened through that building, therefore it was a valid target. It wasn't the best target, but it was a target.
The thing is, the group who attacked the WTC weren't a military. They weren't even paramiltiary. All things indicate a handful of people with boxcutters. There are better organized paramilitary organizations operating within the US daily that carry out widespread crime. They just go under reported because they aren't as important in the eyes of the casual news viewer as a couple big buildings and a bunch of people in suits in a one-time event.
Worse: Collateral damage of all other occupants of the building.
Even worse: They hit the building the target was in 22 hours earlier. That doesn't mean the target was still there.
Mental note: only take selfies outside of businesses and residences of people I don't like.
He's the one that made the claims. He said he did it, and then went to the FBI to explain how he did it. Other than finding the tampered box lid, all the "evidence" is in his claims.
I could knock a panel loose and then claim I hacked the in-flight entertainment system and made an airplane into a sperm whale and then a potted plant. That doesn't make it real, even if I showed them a box containing an infinite improbability drive. Funny thing about that, when most people see it, they see an empty box. How improbable.
NASA already has the answer. Glitter filled Super Balls are the best thing for the job. As we all know, they are infused with magic energy. A 10kg payload traveling at 11.2 km/s could deflect an object the size of the moon.
It does have risks though. Once set in motion, the Super Balls would be set loose on the universe, potentially disrupting entire galaxies.
For the sake of the universe, I hope we never have to deploy such a weapon.
They also have an abundance of people who wear funny hats.
It depends on how the theoretical spaces work. You can have multiple things in the same space. Just where you're sitting, there is air, light, heat, radio waves, sound waves, gravity, probably a few neutrinos.
I just used "spaces" because I couldn't think of a more appropriate word.
That's probably the biggest reason to have good in-house security people. They don't have a financial interest to make breaches or lie about them. It's in their best interest to keep everything secure, and continue to look for new ways to attempt breaking into their own stuff.
I've never felt good about letting third parties in to do security testing. When someone above my rank decided to let a 3rd party do external tests, they'll pick anything and make it sound disastrous. One place was bitching about anything.
They complained that we had the current version of Bind running on the DNS servers. "But people can do DNS requests!" Yup.
They flagged the fact that we dropped unwanted traffic at the firewall. Yup. Get over it. They were upset it took forever to scan the network. Good.
They flagged us for having a web server providing static content. They were upset they couldn't find any way to exploit CGIs or do SQL injection. Yup. That was kind of the idea.
There were a whole bunch of other trivial things that they flagged us for. Then they were brought to the office, and got upset that we didn't provide wifi. Nope, that's a security risk. They wanted to plug their laptop into our network, so they were only given external access. Again, they bitched. But letting an unknown computer owned by an unauthorized party plug into our network is a security risk.
They eventually gave up trying to bully us into dropping our security precautions and gave us a pass.
I already habitually ran tests with privileged access to make sure even if all layers of protection failed, nothing really bad could happen.
Honestly, if they are given everything, they can find something. Give them administrative rights to everything, and credentials to everything, they can find something. Like, email accounts can be accessed with full admin rights. Funny how that works.
Yup, if it wasn't Microsoft, all kinds of other companies could have dominated the desktop market. IBM (OS/2), Quarterdeck (DESQview/X), Apple (Mac OS), NeXT (NeXT), any number of *nix companies (X11), and others.
Microsoft got big because they got the consumers interested, and questionable deals with vendors.
Plenty of people only know the tunnel-vision version of computer history and they believe Microsoft is it. They either don't remember (or are too young to have seen) software boxes (ahh, the good ol' days) had logos to indicate which OS they worked on so you could pick the right one.
Saying "We're sure he had..." without evidence is not evidence. They have to have the evidence that he actually *did* have what is claimed.
That's the hard part. They have to gather the evidence to get the conviction. Without evidence, they can't get a conviction. At least if you have a competent attorney. If you have a crappy one, you'll get the 5 years because they talked you into taking a pre-trial plea agreement. That's how innocent people go to jail.
Remember 7/11 buddy. 7/11. ... I think today is 2 for 1 Slurpee day.