My point is that he should not be able to sue the vendor, just because someone else installed software on his machine, just the same way that the MPMA should not be able to sue MoRE for writing DeCSS. You can hope all you want about my company, because I'm a PHB for the purposes of this discussion.
If I found that someone had installed unauthorized spyware on my machine and broke my anti-spyware, I would be suing not just the individual who installed it on my machine in the first place, but also the company that makes the spyware.
Then you're just as bad as the MPAA for wanting DeCSS to be illegal. If I want to install this on all my company's PCs to keep an eye on my employees, or even on my laptop to spy on anyone that steals it, then provided this is not illegal (maybe I'm a government agency where this is acceptable) then I should be able to buy software that does it.
Re:This is a trojan horse, plain and simple.
on
Spy v. Spy
·
· Score: 2
If my employer installs this on every PC in the company, then I install Who's Watching Me, and Spector disables it, I don't think any crime has been committed, especially not by the makers of the software. This should no more be illegal than DeCSS should be, IMO.
It may not be racketeering, but it is abuse of monopoly power. I know that being a monopoly isn't inherently illegal, but using one monopoly to acquire another is - the question that remains is, is using monopoly power to maintain that monopoly illegal? I don't know.
Re:I saw one of these at the weekend
on
Self-Heating Can
·
· Score: 2
there are solutions to this (free formula for needy mothers, education on how to properly use formlua, reduced agression in marketing) but they all require concessions from someone. and no one likes to concede.
I understand what you are saying, but if consumers deliberately choose the more ethical (or less unethical) companies, then this might just generate market pressure to make the change. So, I buy fairtrade coffee and chocolate. It's worth a try, and makes me feel better.
Re:I saw one of these at the weekend
on
Self-Heating Can
·
· Score: 1
My specific beef with Nestlé is that they strongarm 3rd world doctors into telling new mothers that formula milk is better than mother's milk. Given that some of these places don't have clean water supplies, and the fact that mothers in hospital aren't allowed to breast-feed their babies so their breasts dry up, causes really serious health problems.
I'm not totally married to this stance, if someone can persuade me that I'm misguided or misinformed, then I'm prepared to listen.
Re:I saw one of these at the weekend
on
Self-Heating Can
·
· Score: 2
Also, they are made by the evil Nestlé corporation, so I won't touch them with a barge pole.
I guess they are going to amend the Microsoft Mouse and Microsodt Natural Keyboard licences to permit their use to control Windows XP. Then they also need to bring out a Microsoft Monitor as well, that is licenced for displaying Windows XP. They'll sell a ton when everyone realises that they have to buy one in order to legally use their shiny new XP machines.
"I have made this letter longer than usual, because I lack the time to make it short."
-- Blaise Pascal
If anyone deserved to have a programming language named after him, it was the originator of this quote. I just wish it had been a more concise and expressive language.
"
Can technologists figure out how to replicate the reliability of airplanes, telephones, watches and televisions in future versions of Windows and Linux, so that a mischievous 12-year-old half a world away can't erase a thousand far-flung hard drives?
Absolutely. In January Bill Gates sent a memo to all Microsoft employees declaring a new, overarching, even revolutionary mandate: Software must be reliable and "trustworthy." "
There doesn't seem to be anything in the GPL regarding keeping the original copyright notices in the source. Can I take GPL'd source, strip out the copyright statements, and redistribute it?
Re:Cut and dried Copyright violation
on
Abusing the GPL?
·
· Score: 2
I did RTFA, and came to the same conclusion as the OP. The reason they're GPL'ing it is that it is a derivative work of the original GPL'd code.
Re:Your lawyer is a fucking retard
on
Abusing the GPL?
·
· Score: 2
Who are you to judge?He isn't "judging" in the moral sense, but as I understand it, offering an opinion on culpability. Which I suppose could be described as "judging", but not in the sense that I understood you to be using it.
Doesn't the GPL forbid this? (re-reads GPL) Um... it appears not, it doesn't even require that the original copyright notices be included! (or at least, I could not find the requirement)
Yes, I had heard that - but that shouldn't affect the EFF's efforts. I don't think they need to be involved in "the saving of Elcomsoft", but maybe there is a case for them to be involved in one of the world's most famous "electornic frontiers" cases. Just because Elcomsoft is a spam tool manufacturer, that doesn't mean that the EFF should let the DMCA be further established in a precedent-setting case.
"Each time you redistribute the Program (or any work based on the Program), the recipient automatically receives a license from the original licensor to copy, distribute or modify the Program subject to these terms and conditions."
Subject to these terms and conditions - so the new licence does not shrive the sins comitted.
Slashdot Mirror
My point is that he should not be able to sue the vendor, just because someone else installed software on his machine, just the same way that the MPMA should not be able to sue MoRE for writing DeCSS. You can hope all you want about my company, because I'm a PHB for the purposes of this discussion.
I thought it probably was - fuck 'em then.
If my employer installs this on every PC in the company, then I install Who's Watching Me, and Spector disables it, I don't think any crime has been committed, especially not by the makers of the software. This should no more be illegal than DeCSS should be, IMO.
It may not be racketeering, but it is abuse of monopoly power. I know that being a monopoly isn't inherently illegal, but using one monopoly to acquire another is - the question that remains is, is using monopoly power to maintain that monopoly illegal? I don't know.
http://www.dictionary.com/search?q=hagiographic
My specific beef with Nestlé is that they strongarm 3rd world doctors into telling new mothers that formula milk is better than mother's milk. Given that some of these places don't have clean water supplies, and the fact that mothers in hospital aren't allowed to breast-feed their babies so their breasts dry up, causes really serious health problems.
I'm not totally married to this stance, if someone can persuade me that I'm misguided or misinformed, then I'm prepared to listen.
Also, they are made by the evil Nestlé corporation, so I won't touch them with a barge pole.
Propitery? Equilivent? Avaliable? Furvor? Commercal? Instalation? Execlent? Usefull? Acurratly? Unnoticiable? Noticable? Embeded? Prefrences? Imagianable? Opiton?
I guess they are going to amend the Microsoft Mouse and Microsodt Natural Keyboard licences to permit their use to control Windows XP. Then they also need to bring out a Microsoft Monitor as well, that is licenced for displaying Windows XP. They'll sell a ton when everyone realises that they have to buy one in order to legally use their shiny new XP machines.
"I have made this letter longer than usual, because I lack the time to make it short."
-- Blaise Pascal
If anyone deserved to have a programming language named after him, it was the originator of this quote. I just wish it had been a more concise and expressive language.
ThinkGeek would sell a ton! Every time I order from TG, I order a "Go Away..." sticker or three. I'd add this bumper sticker to every order I make.
Except that the GPL explicitly grants permission to change anything, which could be interpreted to include the copyright statements.
There doesn't seem to be anything in the GPL regarding keeping the original copyright notices in the source. Can I take GPL'd source, strip out the copyright statements, and redistribute it?
I did RTFA, and came to the same conclusion as the OP. The reason they're GPL'ing it is that it is a derivative work of the original GPL'd code.
Okay, I missed the "perferred form" clause.
Now that's an idea - serve up porn instead of ads!
Yes, I had heard that - but that shouldn't affect the EFF's efforts. I don't think they need to be involved in "the saving of Elcomsoft", but maybe there is a case for them to be involved in one of the world's most famous "electornic frontiers" cases. Just because Elcomsoft is a spam tool manufacturer, that doesn't mean that the EFF should let the DMCA be further established in a precedent-setting case.
I think the phrase "Open Source Intelligence" pre-dates the phrase "Open Source Software".
Subject to these terms and conditions - so the new licence does not shrive the sins comitted.