Alternatives to file sharing such as the subscription based Rhapsody and non subscription based I-Tunes are offering quality music for an almost reasonable fee and artists receive royalties. Why is it that some of the biggest names in music who, by definition are hit the hardest by file sharing, won't allow their music to be available via these new distribution methods?
Three weeks? Try four months. The patch was available in March. Only sysadmins that dodn't patch until a vulnerability is being widely publicised will have had three weeks and whos fault is that? Certainly not Microsoft's.
SCO do still have some developers, right? THey have the source code to gcc, yes? So they can just engineer in or out the bits unique to SCO and release their own version of gcc, binary and source code. That's why the GPL was developed after all. It'd be a hollow gesture, time to move on.
Ever tried flying somewhere, awaw for a couple of weeks... DO you carry 10lbs of books or one memory stick / cf card / whatever your palm/pocket pc takes.
Books are big, heave and inconvenient. Palmtops are small, multifunctional, light and their screens are getting better all the time. Battery life on all bar the ones with Pocket PC is good enough for a transatlantic flight.
Anyway, the fact they are being distributed means there is a demand. Look at the facts, if someone can be bothered to scan an entire book and then distribute it with no hope of recognition or reward they must be doing it for the satisfaction of themselves and others enjoying their efforts.
The book industry doesn't make every book available in an ebook format. Whyever not? It's not like they don't have the work in a computer? They can sell it for a bit less than a paper book, but he savings must be astronomical - no distrobution chain to run, no bookshops to pay... If they don't see the advantages they'll be left behind just like the music an video industries.
In the UK, Copyright infringment is a criminal offence. This means you do not ahve to sue, you can walk in to your local police station with evidence that a crime has been committed and they will investigate it.
As to what damages you can claim, being a criminal offence we can look at what penalties could be enforced by the courts. These are determined by the copyright act 2002, amending the Copyright Design and Patents Act 1988.
The 2002 Act raises the maximum penalty for conviction on indictment for the offences referred to in sections 107(4), 198(5) and 297A(2) in Parts I, II and VII of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 respectively. In more detail these offences (which are not themselves changed) are those in:
sections 107(1)(a), (b), d(iv) or (e) of the 1988 Act relating to the making for sale or hire, importing or distributing infringing copies of copyright material;
sections 198(1)(a), (b) or (d)(iii) of the 1988 Act relating to the making for sale or hire, importing or distributing in the course of a business illicit recordings infringing performers' rights; and
section 297A(1) of the 1988 Act relating to making, dealing in or advertising unauthorised decoders for conditional access services.
The new maximum penalty for these offences for conviction on indictment is an unlimited fine and/or up to 10 years in prison to reflect the seriousness of these crimes and to bring the penalties into line with the existing ones for similar trade marks offences in section 92 of the Trade Marks Act 1994. The changes made by the 2002 Act are to increase the maximum prison term from 2 years to 10.
I suspect there has to be at least one UK developer involved in these projects. Now, if a ten year jail term isn't enough to deter, I'm unsure what is.
So lets get this right. I can buy a Mac and use Itunes, or I can use a service that's been around for a year over at rhapsody.com where I can listen to all the music I want for £10 a month, burn CD's for 75c a track and get artists like Delirium. Where the artists aren't listed, rhapsody gives you a list of alternatives.
I'm sorry, the Itunes idea isn't new, is being done better and cheaper per track elsewhere, with a more extensive catalogue, jsut a smaller advertising budget.
They didn't need to add it onto this morning's story, because it was discussed extensively in yesterday's round of SCO bashing. The words SCO is releasing binary, run-only Linux licensing might have been a clue to the editors.
They claim that some of their code made its way into the Linux Kernel, so now they're packaging the entire kernel, making it only available in bianry form and selling it?!?
If anyone has been waiting to test the GPL in court surely now's the time to set up a fighting fund - everyone who's contributed to the kernel is today seing their hard work being stolen, exploited and sold by SCO.
Looking at the rules, the evil bits are in Vermont, Arizona, Tennessee, Puerto Rico and The Rest Of The World - all of whom are not allowed to enter the competition.
I'm sure we'll still be allowed to buy the t-shirt though.
Most of the problems seem to be with MAPI and Microsoft COntrol what Outlook does. However, on Linux we aheva hugely ca[able email program in Ximian's Evolution. If it were to exist on Windows and have a server based company wide contacts calendar sharing and task managment Microsoft would be under pressure even on their home turf.
We had real problems with Outlook and Insght Connector. Some users seemed to experience failures with synchronising which on two occassions resulted in lost mail. That was using cyrus imapd running on SuSE as the server.
Needless to say any lost mail was unacceptable and thus the project ended.
That said, the plugin was plain ugly. It changed the way Outlook works from the users perspective - they need to synchronise their mailbox to get new messages, or schedule that every few minutes, when they're used to receiving mail the second it was sent from the desk across the office.
The client has to meet the user's expectations if it is to be successfuly integrated into an existing office. That's why there's a need for something that really works with Outlook, as that's what the users are used to, sad as it may be.
Unisys claim to have a whole host of patents around the world covering the LZW technology.
You may wish to look at this thread on comp.compression
Just as we in Europe are often affected by US patents, even thought he patent itself isn't valid here, now might be your turn to be affected by patents outside your jurisdiction.
According to Netcraft www.nsa.gov was running on Apache in August last year. Guess someone sent a memo though, as they're using Win2k and security renowned IIS5 these days.
It was released by nullsoft under the GPL - the subsidiary had a choice over the licensing conditions the wanted to use and settled upon the GPL.
Just because their parent company doesn't like that choice, it can't be undone. If AOL have a problem with nullsoft's choice of license, that's an internal matter for the two compaines to resolve.
The only way I can see things being different would be if under contract terms between the two companies AOL had to aprove each piece of software produced by their subsidiary. Then they might argue that the code wasn't nullsoft's to release or give any license to. In much the same way as if someone here found the code to Microsoft Office, they can't just slap the GPL at the top and release it to the world.
Not really, the worm initiated the connection from the user's machine, downloaded the software and executed it - it was pulled by the client not pushed by the server. So they don't run any software on people's computers, just some people have installed (intentionally or otherwise) a program that chooses to download and run this executable.
This raises an interesting question about how, exactly, you are supposed to notify Microsoft by email.
Microsoft make an interesting interpretation of RFCs by accepting all mail to postmaster@ but only insofar as to send an automatic response saying your message will not be read.
This guy also says he tried to email them ten times and never got further than automagic autoreplies. Do they actually have a procedure to inform them when things are broken?
Maybe you should read all the help for developers over at memorystick.org before posting. Sony aren't exactly hiding what they want to do with memorystick and the $4,000 a year license cost is hardly prohibitive to any hardware manufacturer.
Most of us know software patents are bad. Most of us object to them. However, has anyone compiled a list of reasons in nice, plain english (or other european langauge) that we can use to summarise the arguments to our MEPs.
These are busy people. They don't have the time or will to learn what it's all about - they need a summary that says what would happen, what's at stake and what their individual countries could lose out from if these patents are implimented. Has anyone worked on this?
Slashdot Mirror
Alternatives to file sharing such as the subscription based Rhapsody and non subscription based I-Tunes are offering quality music for an almost reasonable fee and artists receive royalties. Why is it that some of the biggest names in music who, by definition are hit the hardest by file sharing, won't allow their music to be available via these new distribution methods?
Three weeks? Try four months. The patch was available in March. Only sysadmins that dodn't patch until a vulnerability is being widely publicised will have had three weeks and whos fault is that? Certainly not Microsoft's.
SCO do still have some developers, right? THey have the source code to gcc, yes? So they can just engineer in or out the bits unique to SCO and release their own version of gcc, binary and source code. That's why the GPL was developed after all. It'd be a hollow gesture, time to move on.
How would you demonstrate that you'll be more resistant to the demands of an election (and those of holding office) than your webserver?
reduce the glare when trying to watch an in-flight movie?
Ever tried flying somewhere, awaw for a couple of weeks... DO you carry 10lbs of books or one memory stick / cf card / whatever your palm/pocket pc takes.
Books are big, heave and inconvenient. Palmtops are small, multifunctional, light and their screens are getting better all the time. Battery life on all bar the ones with Pocket PC is good enough for a transatlantic flight.
Anyway, the fact they are being distributed means there is a demand. Look at the facts, if someone can be bothered to scan an entire book and then distribute it with no hope of recognition or reward they must be doing it for the satisfaction of themselves and others enjoying their efforts.
The book industry doesn't make every book available in an ebook format. Whyever not? It's not like they don't have the work in a computer? They can sell it for a bit less than a paper book, but he savings must be astronomical - no distrobution chain to run, no bookshops to pay... If they don't see the advantages they'll be left behind just like the music an video industries.
As to what damages you can claim, being a criminal offence we can look at what penalties could be enforced by the courts. These are determined by the copyright act 2002, amending the Copyright Design and Patents Act 1988.
The 2002 Act raises the maximum penalty for conviction on indictment for the offences referred to in sections 107(4), 198(5) and 297A(2) in Parts I, II and VII of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 respectively. In more detail these offences (which are not themselves changed) are those in:
The new maximum penalty for these offences for conviction on indictment is an unlimited fine and/or up to 10 years in prison to reflect the seriousness of these crimes and to bring the penalties into line with the existing ones for similar trade marks offences in section 92 of the Trade Marks Act 1994. The changes made by the 2002 Act are to increase the maximum prison term from 2 years to 10.
I suspect there has to be at least one UK developer involved in these projects. Now, if a ten year jail term isn't enough to deter, I'm unsure what is.
was it jsut me, or was the next /. story going to be an ask slashdot with Bruce Perens. The ask /. just vanished from the front page.
I'm sorry, the Itunes idea isn't new, is being done better and cheaper per track elsewhere, with a more extensive catalogue, jsut a smaller advertising budget.
They didn't need to add it onto this morning's story, because it was discussed extensively in yesterday's round of SCO bashing. The words SCO is releasing binary, run-only Linux licensing might have been a clue to the editors.
If anyone has been waiting to test the GPL in court surely now's the time to set up a fighting fund - everyone who's contributed to the kernel is today seing their hard work being stolen, exploited and sold by SCO.
I'm sure we'll still be allowed to buy the t-shirt though.
Most of the problems seem to be with MAPI and Microsoft COntrol what Outlook does. However, on Linux we aheva hugely ca[able email program in Ximian's Evolution. If it were to exist on Windows and have a server based company wide contacts calendar sharing and task managment Microsoft would be under pressure even on their home turf.
We had real problems with Outlook and Insght Connector. Some users seemed to experience failures with synchronising which on two occassions resulted in lost mail. That was using cyrus imapd running on SuSE as the server. Needless to say any lost mail was unacceptable and thus the project ended. That said, the plugin was plain ugly. It changed the way Outlook works from the users perspective - they need to synchronise their mailbox to get new messages, or schedule that every few minutes, when they're used to receiving mail the second it was sent from the desk across the office. The client has to meet the user's expectations if it is to be successfuly integrated into an existing office. That's why there's a need for something that really works with Outlook, as that's what the users are used to, sad as it may be.
SCO won't be offering this new kernel for existing Caldera Linux users then?
You may wish to look at this thread on comp.compression
Just as we in Europe are often affected by US patents, even thought he patent itself isn't valid here, now might be your turn to be affected by patents outside your jurisdiction.
with W.A.S.T.E.?
According to Netcraft www.nsa.gov was running on Apache in August last year. Guess someone sent a memo though, as they're using Win2k and security renowned IIS5 these days.
Just because their parent company doesn't like that choice, it can't be undone. If AOL have a problem with nullsoft's choice of license, that's an internal matter for the two compaines to resolve.
The only way I can see things being different would be if under contract terms between the two companies AOL had to aprove each piece of software produced by their subsidiary. Then they might argue that the code wasn't nullsoft's to release or give any license to. In much the same way as if someone here found the code to Microsoft Office, they can't just slap the GPL at the top and release it to the world.
...is having so many to choose from.
Not really, the worm initiated the connection from the user's machine, downloaded the software and executed it - it was pulled by the client not pushed by the server. So they don't run any software on people's computers, just some people have installed (intentionally or otherwise) a program that chooses to download and run this executable.
Microsoft make an interesting interpretation of RFCs by accepting all mail to postmaster@ but only insofar as to send an automatic response saying your message will not be read.
This guy also says he tried to email them ten times and never got further than automagic autoreplies. Do they actually have a procedure to inform them when things are broken?
Maybe you should read all the help for developers over at memorystick.org before posting. Sony aren't exactly hiding what they want to do with memorystick and the $4,000 a year license cost is hardly prohibitive to any hardware manufacturer.
These are busy people. They don't have the time or will to learn what it's all about - they need a summary that says what would happen, what's at stake and what their individual countries could lose out from if these patents are implimented. Has anyone worked on this?
so you don't need to register