They can issue a per-seat license for their own code. However, any code that is GPL'd wouldn't be bound by the per-seat license.
Companies need to be able to earn money and selling one copy of their code to a multi-billion dollar company just isn't going to cut it. Hopefully they will provide an easy way to discern which parts of the distro are GPL'd and which parts are not.
Also nothing would prevent other distros like Redhat and Mandrake from following the standards without "per-seat" licensing.
This to me, sounds like a good thing. Not all Distros will be the same. SUSE will still be different from turbolinux etc.
What it does mean is that each distro will have things in common. Things that companies can count on like standard libraries, a standard print system etc. It does not stop distros from putting in extra libraries and print systems just guarantees that they will also have the standard ones and, I assume, a easy way for people to know when they install the distro that they have picked the standard features.
One of the things that can really frustrate a developer is to spend a lot of time developing a software product only to find that he has to keep half a dozen versions in order to facilitate the majority of Linux users. It can be a real maintenance nightmare.
I hope that companies like Redhat and Mandrake join in supporting the standard.
...to sell half-full ink cartridges with new printers. I just bought an Epson C80 and I'm sure that the ink cartridges that came with it are of the 'economy' class.
What bothers me more than that is that Epson puts microchips into their cartridges so that "the user can get more information about the state of the cartridges." I'm sure that the side-effect of not allowing me to refill the cartridges was an oversight. Yeah, right.
Re:This is not a "bad" thing...
on
Debian And WineX
·
· Score: 1
OK, I was unclear.
They cannot incorpoorate (into their source tree) any contributions (made) to the LGPL'd tree without following the LGPL license agreement...
I hate SPAM and really enjoy hearing about spammers getting nailed but this probably won't even slow MonsterHut down.
"We are seeking to prevent MonsterHut from continuing its fraudulent, deceptive and illegal practices, not just over PaeTec's network, but over any ISP in New York," Spitzer said.
Well, That's good for New York but MonsterHut will simply move its operations into another state and continue to spam.
The Attorney General is seeking a court order to: Enjoin MonsterHut, Pelow, and Hartl from falsely representing the nature of their unsolicited commercial email; Require MonsterHut, Pelow and Hartl to disclose how it obtained all the consumers' email addresses; and
(Now this could be good if they would/could go after people who sell harvested email addresses.)
Require MonsterHut, Pelow and Hartl to pay civil penalties and court costs for its violations of New York's consumer protection laws.
How much will they pay in civil penalties and court costs? Will the amount exceed the amount that these jerks got spamming people? If not then it doesn't seem much of an incentive to stop.
Personally, I feel that we need to get these cases out of the civil courts and into the criminal courts. I think that if Pelow and Hartl had to spend some quality time with Bubba the Butt Fucker they might not spam again.
Re:This is not a "bad" thing...
on
Debian And WineX
·
· Score: 1
"That has got to be utter BS. If they took their source from an X11 license, then they can keep their source under X11, or they could move it all to LGPL, or GPl, no?"
So what part of what I said is BS? I said that TransGaming could keep their code closed but if they took any more code from the NOW LGPL'd wine they would have to follow the license for LGPL'd which I believe means that they would be forced to place the code that incorporated LGPL'd code under that license.
the idea that ISPs are responsible for the content of the web pages that their customer's put up will have consequences.
The only way to comply with German law is for the ISP to review every single web page before it is posted so that they can remove any content that they feel might be offensive and you can forget about dynamically generated pages.
This is not a "bad" thing...
on
Debian And WineX
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
If we want Linux to become "main stream" we need to allow companies who support us to earn a living doing so. If TransGaming wants to keep their source closed, they have the right to do so under the X11 license. Now that WINE is under the LGPL license, they cannot incorporate any contributions to the LGPL'd tree without following the LGPL license agreement, which, I believe, would force them to put their source tree under the LGPL also.
So, if they want to go it alone without the support of the open source community then God bless them but as Wine moves forward or in a different direction they will need to keep their source tree free of LGPL'd code.
The two branches will get farther and farther apart and eventually, I believe that the Open Source branch will be superior and TransGaming will be in danger of going the way of the dinosaur.
Oh my God! I looked at it! Now the movie industry will try to have my eyeballs removed just in case there is some residual imprint on the back of them!
No matter how they twist it, it is speech.
on
DeCSS' Continuing Saga
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
"Historically, the dissemination of stolen trade secrets has not been protected by the First Amendment," the DVD CCA wrote in its brief."
This "trade secret" was NOT stolen. No one hacked into anybody's computer or broke into anyone's office to steal anything. The encryption technique was reverse engineered which IS legal. Discussing the reverse engineering process and ones findings with others IS legal and protected by the first amendment.
"And there's no guarantee that the government will honor the GPL spirit either."
Actually I don't believe that the GPL requires that you make the source code of your modifications available unless you distribute the binaries.
It would not be unreasonable to consider the government one big entity in which case they could modify the code, use it internaly and keep the source secret without violating the GPL.
If your source is open and a flaw is found and patched you get cudos.
If your source is closed and you have a policy of security through obscurity and you eventually release a patch for a flaw that someone who does not have the source found anyway you get railed.
Re:One thing I've NEVER seen here....
on
Fair IP Laws?
·
· Score: 2
My case has to do with using software patents AND monopoly power to maintain their monopoly. Microsoft's embrace and extend strategy is a prime example.
Using their monopoly OS as a delivery vehicle, they embrace a technology then they extend it in some proprietary way. The technology doesn't need to be related to their operating system in any way. But once people start using Microsoft's version any competing products are rendered irrelevant.
I'm not saying that patents are ?bad? or shouldn't be issued. I'm saying that monopolies, if unchecked, can use patents in a way that unfairly stifles competitors.
Re:One thing I've NEVER seen here....
on
Fair IP Laws?
·
· Score: 2
Not all patents are bad but in the case of a monopoly power such as Microsoft, don't you feel it would be easy to in order to maintain and expand their monopoly power? If Microsoft incorporates a patented protocol and then incorporates it in some way into their operating system it essentially becomes the standard due to the fact that about 98 percent of computers run their OS. Who can compete?
Not all things should be protected.
on
Fair IP Laws?
·
· Score: 1
Some things should be covered by copyright and patents other things should not. You only need to look and see how big corporations like Microsoft are abusing the system to get a clue.
Formats and protocols are frequently used to prevent competitors from competing. These should not be covered by copyright or patent. On the contrary, protocols and formats should be required to be disclosed in full by law.
So, Word the program would be covered by copyright but the.doc file format would be required to be disclosed. This would ensure that competitors could compete by writing software that was compatible. The same thing should be true of networking protocols. Everyone should be allowed to understand and write software using any protocol but the software that is written should be protected.
"...but Microsoft might decide to lower the price of the X-Box a little bit more in retaliation."
I don't believe that Microsoft will really care that Nintendo lowered their price. The Nintendo game cube does not come with a DVD player so it would be suicide to sell it for the same price as gaming platforms that do and Microsoft knows that.
This is the same bill that would allow most of our information to be shared unless we opt-out and only protects the information that is already protected.
Jeez, I didn't realize just how much of a spin/. was willing to put on a story to get people worked up.
Migrating away from Microsoft can be a daunting task. Microsoft provides software packages that tightly integrate with each other. If you use any of the special features it becomes even harder to migrate.
For Office products Star Office is a pretty obvious choice, as long as you don't rely on macros. If you do need macros you'll have to rewrite them to use the Star Office macro language. I'm not sure how hard that would be. I guess it would depend on how sophisticated your macros are.
Star Office does come with a Word Processor that will read Word documents and a spreadsheet program that I believe will read Excel documents. It also comes with a presentation program that reads most PowerPoint files. I don't know if the Adabas program will read Access files. I kind of doubt it but it is a fine database program in its own right.
I believe that there is a Word Perfect suite for both Windows and Linux also but I don't know much about it. Maybe others here would be kind enough to fill you in about the Word Perfect suite.
Mandrake comes with an automatic updater. It looks at your system, then at available patches (Youj can specify security, bug-fixes and/or regular patches.) it then gives you a list of available upgrades. You can easily select all of them or just the ones you want. It will download the patches and install them for you.
And Mandrake has been doing this a lot longer than Microsoft.
Slashdot Mirror
They can issue a per-seat license for their own code. However, any code that is GPL'd wouldn't be bound by the per-seat license.
Companies need to be able to earn money and selling one copy of their code to a multi-billion dollar company just isn't going to cut it. Hopefully they will provide an easy way to discern which parts of the distro are GPL'd and which parts are not.
Also nothing would prevent other distros like Redhat and Mandrake from following the standards without "per-seat" licensing.
So why haven't you sued Wallace. (Pennsylvania of course.) Turn about is fair play.. Right?
This to me, sounds like a good thing. Not all Distros will be the same. SUSE will still be different from turbolinux etc.
What it does mean is that each distro will have things in common. Things that companies can count on like standard libraries, a standard print system etc. It does not stop distros from putting in extra libraries and print systems just guarantees that they will also have the standard ones and, I assume, a easy way for people to know when they install the distro that they have picked the standard features.
One of the things that can really frustrate a developer is to spend a lot of time developing a software product only to find that he has to keep half a dozen versions in order to facilitate the majority of Linux users. It can be a real maintenance nightmare.
I hope that companies like Redhat and Mandrake join in supporting the standard.
Come on, this site is 99.95% male Geeks and Nerds. Do you really think that any of us have a clue about what a normal female student would want??
Pass my sliderule would ya?
...to sell half-full ink cartridges with new printers. I just bought an Epson C80 and I'm sure that the ink cartridges that came with it are of the 'economy' class.
What bothers me more than that is that Epson puts microchips into their cartridges so that "the user can get more information about the state of the cartridges." I'm sure that the side-effect of not allowing me to refill the cartridges was an oversight. Yeah, right.
OK, I was unclear.
They cannot incorpoorate (into their source tree) any contributions (made) to the LGPL'd tree without following the LGPL license agreement...
I hate SPAM and really enjoy hearing about spammers getting nailed but this probably won't even slow MonsterHut down.
"We are seeking to prevent MonsterHut from continuing its fraudulent, deceptive and illegal practices, not just over PaeTec's network, but over any ISP in New York," Spitzer said.
Well, That's good for New York but MonsterHut will simply move its operations into another state and continue to spam.
The Attorney General is seeking a court order to:
Enjoin MonsterHut, Pelow, and Hartl from falsely representing the nature of their unsolicited commercial email;
Require MonsterHut, Pelow and Hartl to disclose how it obtained all the consumers' email addresses; and
(Now this could be good if they would/could go after people who sell harvested email addresses.)
Require MonsterHut, Pelow and Hartl to pay civil penalties and court costs for its violations of New York's consumer protection laws.
How much will they pay in civil penalties and court costs? Will the amount exceed the amount that these jerks got spamming people? If not then it doesn't seem much of an incentive to stop.
Personally, I feel that we need to get these cases out of the civil courts and into the criminal courts. I think that if Pelow and Hartl had to spend some quality time with Bubba the Butt Fucker they might not spam again.
"That has got to be utter BS. If they took their source from an X11 license, then they can keep their source under X11, or they could move it all to LGPL, or GPl, no?"
So what part of what I said is BS? I said that TransGaming could keep their code closed but if they took any more code from the NOW LGPL'd wine they would have to follow the license for LGPL'd which I believe means that they would be forced to place the code that incorporated LGPL'd code under that license.
the idea that ISPs are responsible for the content of the web pages that their customer's put up will have consequences.
The only way to comply with German law is for the ISP to review every single web page before it is posted so that they can remove any content that they feel might be offensive and you can forget about dynamically generated pages.
If we want Linux to become "main stream" we need to allow companies who support us to earn a living doing so. If TransGaming wants to keep their source closed, they have the right to do so under the X11 license. Now that WINE is under the LGPL license, they cannot incorporate any contributions to the LGPL'd tree without following the LGPL license agreement, which, I believe, would force them to put their source tree under the LGPL also.
So, if they want to go it alone without the support of the open source community then God bless them but as Wine moves forward or in a different direction they will need to keep their source tree free of LGPL'd code.
The two branches will get farther and farther apart and eventually, I believe that the Open Source branch will be superior and TransGaming will be in danger of going the way of the dinosaur.
"XP Service Pack Does the Impossible"
Makes a Microsoft OS Secure and reliable???
Oh my God! I looked at it! Now the movie industry will try to have my eyeballs removed just in case there is some residual imprint on the back of them!
"Historically, the dissemination of stolen trade secrets has not been protected by the First Amendment," the DVD CCA wrote in its brief."
This "trade secret" was NOT stolen. No one hacked into anybody's computer or broke into anyone's office to steal anything. The encryption technique was reverse engineered which IS legal. Discussing the reverse engineering process and ones findings with others IS legal and protected by the first amendment.
"And there's no guarantee that the government will honor the GPL spirit either."
Actually I don't believe that the GPL requires that you make the source code of your modifications available unless you distribute the binaries.
It would not be unreasonable to consider the government one big entity in which case they could modify the code, use it internaly and keep the source secret without violating the GPL.
"A little consistency is all I ask!"
I think that we are fairly consistant:
If your source is open and a flaw is found and patched you get cudos.
If your source is closed and you have a policy of security through obscurity and you eventually release a patch for a flaw that someone who does not have the source found anyway you get railed.
For sale - Music CD circumvention devices.
Comes in scented and unscented.
My case has to do with using software patents AND monopoly power to maintain their monopoly. Microsoft's embrace and extend strategy is a prime example.
Using their monopoly OS as a delivery vehicle, they embrace a technology then they extend it in some proprietary way. The technology doesn't need to be related to their operating system in any way. But once people start using Microsoft's version any competing products are rendered irrelevant.
I'm not saying that patents are ?bad? or shouldn't be issued. I'm saying that monopolies, if unchecked, can use patents in a way that unfairly stifles competitors.
Not all patents are bad but in the case of a monopoly power such as Microsoft, don't you feel it would be easy to in order to maintain and expand their monopoly power? If Microsoft incorporates a patented protocol and then incorporates it in some way into their operating system it essentially becomes the standard due to the fact that about 98 percent of computers run their OS. Who can compete?
Some things should be covered by copyright and patents other things should not. You only need to look and see how big corporations like Microsoft are abusing the system to get a clue.
.doc file format would be required to be disclosed. This would ensure that competitors could compete by writing software that was compatible. The same thing should be true of networking protocols. Everyone should be allowed to understand and write software using any protocol but the software that is written should be protected.
Formats and protocols are frequently used to prevent competitors from competing. These should not be covered by copyright or patent. On the contrary, protocols and formats should be required to be disclosed in full by law.
So, Word the program would be covered by copyright but the
"...but Microsoft might decide to lower the price of the X-Box a little bit more in retaliation."
I don't believe that Microsoft will really care that Nintendo lowered their price. The Nintendo game cube does not come with a DVD player so it would be suicide to sell it for the same price as gaming platforms that do and Microsoft knows that.
This is the same bill that would allow most of our information to be shared unless we opt-out and only protects the information that is already protected.
/. was willing to put on a story to get people worked up.
Jeez, I didn't realize just how much of a spin
DO NOT SUPPORT THIS BILL!!!
Migrating away from Microsoft can be a daunting task. Microsoft provides software packages that tightly integrate with each other. If you use any of the special features it becomes even harder to migrate.
For Office products Star Office is a pretty obvious choice, as long as you don't rely on macros. If you do need macros you'll have to rewrite them to use the Star Office macro language. I'm not sure how hard that would be. I guess it would depend on how sophisticated your macros are.
Star Office does come with a Word Processor that will read Word documents and a spreadsheet program that I believe will read Excel documents. It also comes with a presentation program that reads most PowerPoint files. I don't know if the Adabas program will read Access files. I kind of doubt it but it is a fine database program in its own right.
I believe that there is a Word Perfect suite for both Windows and Linux also but I don't know much about it. Maybe others here would be kind enough to fill you in about the Word Perfect suite.
I am very aware that a Judge will exclude evidence that isn't relevant. This evidence IS relevant.
"Congratulations on becoming the poster boy for IANAL."
Bad day or are you just a jerk?
Good. I hardly get any spam on my hotmail account. Now I won't feel so lonely....
Mandrake comes with an automatic updater. It looks at your system, then at available patches (Youj can specify security, bug-fixes and/or regular patches.) it then gives you a list of available upgrades. You can easily select all of them or just the ones you want. It will download the patches and install them for you.
And Mandrake has been doing this a lot longer than Microsoft.