It should also be noted that the Justice Department jobs are career positions and not political appointments (except when Alberto Gonzales is in charge). That means the people working this case today are most likely the same people who were working the case before Obama took office. I'd attribute any actions in the case to inertia at this point.
not nearly as panic inducing as I first thought, although I'm sure my program management is going to get all bent out of shape about it anyway. Bad news if you Apache with WL though.
Given his track record doing the same kind of stuff to Howard Stern and Janet Reno among others it's a safe bet that the guy should have been locked up 20 years ago
Of course, that assumes that Microsoft actually implements any of the changes that ISO makes to the standard. I wouldn't put it past them to not follow their own standard if it stops suiting their need.
High profile people are more likely to have their records accessed unnecessarily than any of us. The flags were put in place after Bill Clinton had his records searched by political enemies trying to prove he dodged the draft during his first run for president. Hopefully they have an access/audit trail for the records so that if something improper goes on it can be properly investigated but sending up an alert every time everyone's records are accessed would be a pretty stupid idea.
a beta version having worse performance than a production version isn't exactly the same as an ancient, no longer supported version having better performance than the current production version.
This case is actually a textbook example of why patents exist. TiVo came up with a novel, innovative product and basically created the market for DVRs. Dish copies the idea, having to invest much less into R&D because they can just do what TiVo does, bundles it with their service so they can cut TiVo out of the market. TiVo is different from a patent troll because TiVo was actively developing and selling products based on the technology and were actually harmed by Dish's violation of their rights.
One of the reasons PS2 is still selling at a good clip is because developers haven't completely abandoned the platform yet. Eventually games will stop coming out for it and sales of it will drop to nothing.
So basically, the Court held that software patents are unenforceable under US patent law as long as you don't load the software on any device inside the US. True. Of course as soon as you try to import it into the US you get whacked with patent infringement.
lots of contracts are what's called "cost plus." the government agrees to pay the contractor however much money it costs them to do the job, plus an award fee that's determined by performance. In the case GP describes, Company A pockets the difference between what Company B charged and what the government payed in violation of the contract. This should get picked up in an audit unless the organization involved is particularly incompetent.
It's also possible (and more likely) that because of their partnership Company A buys products/services from Company B despite Company C offering a better/cheaper solution and fudges the results of trade studies so that it looks like Company B won outright. This also violates all sorts of rules of government acquisition; contractors are not allowed to let pre-existing relationships with vendors influence how they procure and/or subcontract. The government pays more than it should and Company A gets some form of compensation from Company B.
Blizzard's argument is pretty simple and not at all like you characterize it at all. Basically they say that using WoWglider is a violation of the EULA and TOS and anyone doing so has their license revoked. By continuing to use WoW they are violating Blizzard's copyright. The EULA states that you cannot use third party programs to automate playing WoW. The makers of WoWglider know or should know that using their program causes people to violate Blizzard's EULA and commit copyright infringement and are liable for that.
to distribute the derivative work you've just created, which is why Blizzard is suing (among other reasons). The logic Blizzard is using is almost exactly the same logic that the FSF uses in the GPL when it comes to linking. WoWglider is useless without WoW. It has specific knowledge of what WoW.exe looks like in memory and feeds it input based on the state of the game. Anti-Virus software applies the same generic algorithm to wow.exe as it does to firefox.exe.
Not only that, but logs of who checked what out when should be a part of their source control system. IBM gave SCO a server that contained a complete copy of the repository that would have had that information in it, if SCO actually bothered to look for it.
NEVER go into court without at least consulting a lawyer. Even if you think all the evidence is in your favor, you could get procedurally out maneuvered.
The truth of this statement is, of course, an entirely separate discussion.
Actually, it IS the discussion at hand. In the hearing IBM stated that they have depositions from the heads of those companies saying that IBM did not in fact pressure them. This means that all of SCOx's evidence is hearsay. Additionally IBM goes on to say that even if what SCOx was right, what they claim IBM did is not illegal.
Sony not learning from past mistakes? I would never imagine that the company that brought us betamax, minidisc, memory sticks, and blu ray would repeatedly release products with the same glaring design flaws.
Not all screenshot are admissible in court. There's specific products that take screenshots that are admissible though, I believe PJ over at groklaw has talked about/used one before.
That is correct. SCO's argument is that because that's the only evidence that they have to support those claims, the court is effectively throwing out the claims because they're throwing out the evidence. They ignore the fact that the "millions of lines of infringing" code never materialized, that the evidence they did disclose by the deadline was incomplete by the standards they were holding IBM to and the standards the court specified, and that they later tried to slip evidence in expert reports after fact discovery was closed so IBM couldn't do anything about that evidence.
Since/. is so slow on this, it should be noted that Judge Kimball rejected the request on a technicality that they filed as a request what should be a motion. Armchair analysis seems to indicate that the rejection might be his way of saying "You really don't want to do this" to SCO. This request basically calls the judge a liar or too incompetent to understand what a de novo review is. It's like SCO is trying to get found in contempt...
IANAL but I'm guessing it's a trademark/copyright suit. He's making money off selling something related to their trademarked content and is potentially using pieces of their copyrighted code in it. The TOS isn't really relevant here, the only remedy for violating it is account termination. There is still a license for the game that you agree to at the same time as the TOS though, and that's probably got the bits about reverse engineering and things of that nature.
Slashdot Mirror
It should also be noted that the Justice Department jobs are career positions and not political appointments (except when Alberto Gonzales is in charge). That means the people working this case today are most likely the same people who were working the case before Obama took office. I'd attribute any actions in the case to inertia at this point.
Tragic plane crash just before he was supposed to testify about it. After several other instances of plane trouble.
not nearly as panic inducing as I first thought, although I'm sure my program management is going to get all bent out of shape about it anyway. Bad news if you Apache with WL though.
Given his track record doing the same kind of stuff to Howard Stern and Janet Reno among others it's a safe bet that the guy should have been locked up 20 years ago
They make pretty good mice
Of course, that assumes that Microsoft actually implements any of the changes that ISO makes to the standard. I wouldn't put it past them to not follow their own standard if it stops suiting their need.
High profile people are more likely to have their records accessed unnecessarily than any of us. The flags were put in place after Bill Clinton had his records searched by political enemies trying to prove he dodged the draft during his first run for president. Hopefully they have an access/audit trail for the records so that if something improper goes on it can be properly investigated but sending up an alert every time everyone's records are accessed would be a pretty stupid idea.
a beta version having worse performance than a production version isn't exactly the same as an ancient, no longer supported version having better performance than the current production version.
This case is actually a textbook example of why patents exist. TiVo came up with a novel, innovative product and basically created the market for DVRs. Dish copies the idea, having to invest much less into R&D because they can just do what TiVo does, bundles it with their service so they can cut TiVo out of the market. TiVo is different from a patent troll because TiVo was actively developing and selling products based on the technology and were actually harmed by Dish's violation of their rights.
One of the reasons PS2 is still selling at a good clip is because developers haven't completely abandoned the platform yet. Eventually games will stop coming out for it and sales of it will drop to nothing.
It'd fall under either latches or unclean hands because their actions are contributing to your "violation"
Hey, getting to Jupiter is important. We're already behind schedule for finding the Monoliths
It's also possible (and more likely) that because of their partnership Company A buys products/services from Company B despite Company C offering a better/cheaper solution and fudges the results of trade studies so that it looks like Company B won outright. This also violates all sorts of rules of government acquisition; contractors are not allowed to let pre-existing relationships with vendors influence how they procure and/or subcontract. The government pays more than it should and Company A gets some form of compensation from Company B.
Blizzard's argument is pretty simple and not at all like you characterize it at all. Basically they say that using WoWglider is a violation of the EULA and TOS and anyone doing so has their license revoked. By continuing to use WoW they are violating Blizzard's copyright. The EULA states that you cannot use third party programs to automate playing WoW. The makers of WoWglider know or should know that using their program causes people to violate Blizzard's EULA and commit copyright infringement and are liable for that.
to distribute the derivative work you've just created, which is why Blizzard is suing (among other reasons). The logic Blizzard is using is almost exactly the same logic that the FSF uses in the GPL when it comes to linking. WoWglider is useless without WoW. It has specific knowledge of what WoW.exe looks like in memory and feeds it input based on the state of the game. Anti-Virus software applies the same generic algorithm to wow.exe as it does to firefox.exe.
Not only that, but logs of who checked what out when should be a part of their source control system. IBM gave SCO a server that contained a complete copy of the repository that would have had that information in it, if SCO actually bothered to look for it.
NEVER go into court without at least consulting a lawyer. Even if you think all the evidence is in your favor, you could get procedurally out maneuvered.
Funny, I thought this standard conflicted with the ISO standard for time because it incorrectly treats 1900 as a leap year in spreadsheets.
Actually, it IS the discussion at hand. In the hearing IBM stated that they have depositions from the heads of those companies saying that IBM did not in fact pressure them. This means that all of SCOx's evidence is hearsay. Additionally IBM goes on to say that even if what SCOx was right, what they claim IBM did is not illegal.
Sony not learning from past mistakes? I would never imagine that the company that brought us betamax, minidisc, memory sticks, and blu ray would repeatedly release products with the same glaring design flaws.
Not all screenshot are admissible in court. There's specific products that take screenshots that are admissible though, I believe PJ over at groklaw has talked about/used one before.
Since /. is so slow on this, it should be noted that Judge Kimball rejected the request on a technicality that they filed as a request what should be a motion. Armchair analysis seems to indicate that the rejection might be his way of saying "You really don't want to do this" to SCO. This request basically calls the judge a liar or too incompetent to understand what a de novo review is. It's like SCO is trying to get found in contempt...
Nullity is a much more cromulent word.
IANAL but I'm guessing it's a trademark/copyright suit. He's making money off selling something related to their trademarked content and is potentially using pieces of their copyrighted code in it. The TOS isn't really relevant here, the only remedy for violating it is account termination. There is still a license for the game that you agree to at the same time as the TOS though, and that's probably got the bits about reverse engineering and things of that nature.