I presume they're referring to things like Samba, that are included in OpenServer. The claim is not that SCO have stolen GPL code, but rather that they use GPL'd products in their own OS distributions, while claiming that we're all filthy thieving commie hippies.
Jimbo Wales (founder / benevolent dictator of Wikipedia) was recently approached by a major publishing company about the possibility of a printed version of Wikipedia.
Will it come with a free bottle of correction fluid and a pen?
Such a situation is particularly troublesome where A is in no way acting to threaten the freedom of free software, but B *is* doing so (perhaps, for example, by bringing not patent claims but trade secret and contractual claims against A with the specific intent of harming the freedom of free software)
As if that would ever happen... what did you say? Darl Mc-who?
Rimmer: Holly, as the Esperantinos would say, "Bonvolu alsendi la pordiston? Lausajne estas rano en mia bideo!" And I think we all know what that means. Holly: Yeah, it means, "Could you send for the hall porter? There appears to be a frog in my bidet."
I'd expect German law (and US, along with probably every Berne signatory) says "you've been given permission by the copyright holder(s) to make the two copies, so go ahead.
I'm sure I've been told (by someone whose job is teaching the disabled to use computers) that Times New Roman is relatively difficult for partially-sighted people to read, and sans-serif fonts such as Arial are much better. Can someone confirm/refute this, and does anyone know if they've taken this into account?
Yes, but if I register copyright on "code A to perform process B", and my opponent applies for a patent on process B 6 months down the line, then code A should in theory be proof that prior art for process B exists. Particularly since the registration process involves giving the copyright office a copy of much of the code in question (according to the US Copyright Office).
In reality of course, this relies on government departments working together flawlessly. And we all know how often that happens:P
does that basically kill thier argument about anything that copies DVD because if it is public knowledge anyone can do what they want
I doubt it - wouldn't the DMCA's thing about defeating copy-protection still apply? And even if that fails, I'm suer they've got other tricks up their sleeve.
Slashdot Mirror
I think the tax only "allows you" (in some sense - I don't know the details) to download files, not to share them yourself.
I presume they're referring to things like Samba, that are included in OpenServer. The claim is not that SCO have stolen GPL code, but rather that they use GPL'd products in their own OS distributions, while claiming that we're all filthy thieving commie hippies.
Damn right! For extra security, they should use SE Linux instead ...
He works for SCO?
... would they call it a "Sno-Cona"?
OK, I c ... er, see.
... that Forbes.com's new spokes...amphibian may have been a factor.
For comparison, in 10 years Microsoft went from Windows 3.0 to Windows 2000! Clear proof that Microsoft's development process is far superior.
I hear that now it can process over nine tax returns per day.
Hey, don't forget that if it does, you owe us all a taco.
Tricksy little McBridessss. They sued our precioussss!</obGollum>
Not quite like most girls I meet in clubs:
Will it come with a free bottle of correction fluid and a pen?
Yeah, you upsiders would love that, wouldn't you!
(Quoted from Eben's message)
As if that would ever happen ... what did you say? Darl Mc-who?
Rimmer: Holly, as the Esperantinos would say, "Bonvolu alsendi la pordiston? Lausajne estas rano en mia bideo!" And I think we all know what that means.
Holly: Yeah, it means, "Could you send for the hall porter? There appears to be a frog in my bidet."
Try HubbleSite - their article includes a full-res JPEG/TIFF image.
(N.b. Apologies to their webmasters/hosting company)
When he said that he wanted to
I don't think that 'T&A' is what he meant. Then again, looking's as close as I ever get, so what do I know :P
A flaw was found in AOL Instant Messenger relating to the A/S/L library.
I'd expect German law (and US, along with probably every Berne signatory) says "you've been given permission by the copyright holder(s) to make the two copies, so go ahead.
I'm sure I've been told (by someone whose job is teaching the disabled to use computers) that Times New Roman is relatively difficult for partially-sighted people to read, and sans-serif fonts such as Arial are much better. Can someone confirm/refute this, and does anyone know if they've taken this into account?
But on the other hand, it could also suggest that the new processor packs a punch.
Sound like a bunch of dingleberries to me.
Yes, but if I register copyright on "code A to perform process B", and my opponent applies for a patent on process B 6 months down the line, then code A should in theory be proof that prior art for process B exists. Particularly since the registration process involves giving the copyright office a copy of much of the code in question (according to the US Copyright Office).
In reality of course, this relies on government departments working together flawlessly. And we all know how often that happens :P
I doubt it - wouldn't the DMCA's thing about defeating copy-protection still apply? And even if that fails, I'm suer they've got other tricks up their sleeve.
Um, I mean sure :-\