"but should MS be allowed to trademark a common everyday word, one used to describe not only their product, but all similar products."
Certainly. If a word is used to describe a generic type of product it could not be registered.
At the time it was registered, "Windows" was capable of distinguising a specific product (an operating system) from others in the market. I haven't personally seen any evidence that Windows has become a generic trade name for operating systems. When people refer to it, they refer to a particular operating system. So, the trade mark would seem (IMHO) to be valid.
In England, you (a)wouldn't be able to copyright a name, and (b) wouldn't be able to trade mark a phrase that was sufficiently close to another trade mark to mislead.
The use of a Registered Trade Mark is to protect your investment in a brand name. If Lindows is close enough to Windows for someone to mistake the two - or to think that Microsoft is endorsing the product - then it would be illegal to use it under trade mark law. Even if these conditions aren't met, the use of a trade name might (and probably would in this case) be prevented by the common law offence of "passing off".
"Your freedom to extend your arm extends to the beginning of my nose"
I would say that freedom of expression ends when it will (not "might" or "could") cause significent real harm to an innocent individual. Thus pr0n featuring and bought by willing people should be covered by freedom of expression; pr0n featuring unwilling victims or forced on other people who are not willing to watch should *not* be convered by freedom of expression. Dito bomb making (but not drug making, since this does not harm anyone directly who is not willing to be harm).
To my mind, restricting the information available to a child comes in under "parental responsibility" not "judicial responsibility". the production of pr0n is another matter, of course - where judicial control is warranted for underage individuals.
And how much of that was spent by the government? And how much of that was spent on microsoft products? And how much of the remaining amount is actually at threat, considering most of the licenses will be long term, and the cost of switching legacy systems to Linux would be prohibitive?
Erm, Just how much Microsoft software does brazil (as a nation) actually buy? (as supposed to "rip-off")*. And how much does it cost to localize Microsoft software to Brazil?
The majority of Microsoft profits have always come from the US. And they probably always will
* yeah, Brazil isn't a particularly bad offender, compared to China, hong Kong, etc.
The law has been tightened to require the use of a please *Do* sell my personal data. Even then, the opt in has only limited validity ( you can't sell the data for a purpose other than specified in the form. So, you can't sell info from a credit card application to p*rn'r'us. )
"does Delphi still require you to write in Pascal"
Nope. It requires you to write object pascal. Could be worse. Could be Modula-2;)
"No time like now to take up Python again." Python's OK as well. As is Java, Perl, C, C++, and the variety of others. All I was saying is that if you want to write in a windows-style tool, you can in linux.
MS isn't the only real OS out there... but it also isn't the total heap of [unsayable] that some people on slashdot seem to think.
Yes, it does have security holes. And yes, microsoft does fix them when it can. Linux has security holes, and people fix them when they can.
As for the people who keep on going on about languages: I program in C, Corba, VB, Pascal, perl, VB6,.Net, Delphi, C++ Shell Script, or ASP depending on what is best for the customer. I use the OS that is best for the particular task. There IS not true OS. There IS no true programming language, technique or methedology. Sheesh!
Wine is good because it gives users a false sence of security. They get the Linux thingie, and press button, and they can use the same programs they used in windows.
What they failed to realise is that after a few years, the new software in windows will start to require Microsoft Servers (tm) using Microsoft Fuzzy Logic(tm)(RIP) and they'll be forced into either using the native linux applications, or paying bill the banker $500 a license for a piece of software that crashes every two seconds. They will use native linux, since they'll have got over the fright by then.
"They have come up with a software program that models a computer user's behavior and gives the user advice, corrects his errors or saves files according to the user's own logic"
I'm not from SCO, and i don't necessarily agree with the law suit. But (despite the fact i'll be modded to -8;) I'll try to reply to your questions
How do you address claims that SCO's demonstrated evidence so far is not theirs to copyright! We are going to court to prove this. In any case, whether the work is our copyright or not is not in question. What is important is whether the work was in the public domain, and whether IBM failed to honour an agreement on confidentiality of code.
Nobody has answered the questions about the four kernal modules origin and algorithms being textbook common knowledge - in whole or in part. Why is this considered IP?
All knowledge that can be protected under the law is IP. What is in question is whether the original knowledge was distributed legitimately. We believe it was not.
Why did SCO keep distributing the GPL'd code while putting out press releases?
This is irrelevant. What is in question is whether the code that IBM distributed was done so legally. The distribution of legitimately GPL'd code is not in question. SCO can do that like any other organisation or person, as long as it keeps the conditions of the GPL.
Why does SCO make use of many many GPL'd tools for their own product?
See the above answer. Why does SCO [threaten to] spread this lawsuit out to Linux users instead of only IBM's copyright infringement case?
Anyone who uses infringing code is commiting a copyright violation. As a management, we have responsibility to our shareholders to maximise the value of the company. This requires us to ensure that we are paid for our products, even if to do so we have to sue illegitimate users. This is the case for any organisation.
How is SCO planning a business model around a licensed copy of Linux when it will be quickly obsolete once the full body of evidence is released?
By continuing to license and produce excellent intellectual property.
What are your definitions of "derivative works" in this case? Would future version of Linux without any SCO IP be within those bounds?
The law is quite clear on this point. Look it up;)
Why are the true numbers of lost existing customers for SCO due directly to their adopting a "free" Linux alternative? How are they calculating damages?
The number of users of the affected distributions is a start. We then times the average licensing cost by the number of users of those distributions (defined by downloads from mirror sites.)
Can SCO provide the complete code references to things it DID contribute to Linux (as SCO or Caldera) and thus differentiate between given and stolen? Yes. Whether we will or not, is a different matter;)
... We can only hope that the critical control software isn't written in VB.
Tester: Looks like there's a critical error in this program Programmer: It'll take me two days to fix it. manager:Do it in ten minutes. programmer: hm on error resume next. OK, done.
Administrator:We need a new firewall program manager:I thought we got one only last decade administrator: We did, but... And in the next Episode, Kaboom!
Even at the senior developer level, there's too much compromising and too much "wiring code" to make most PhD's happy; and their tendency to pursue elegance at the expense of expedience no matter what the situation can slow everybody else down too.
Hm. having known several PhD's at work in development positions in the UK, I would say that PhD's are no more likely to write elegant solutions than BSc's or NVQ's.
I'm a part-time PhD student, working full time, and have been described as a hacker by almost everyone I've worked with. Expedience chosen at every opportunity;)
In other news, Bill Gates rebuts rumours of a Red Hat release seven. "Windows is already at release 2003, and we will soon release 2005 (planned for 2007). This shows how much more mature Windows is compared to our Linux alternatives."
A spokesman from HP has declined to make any comment, and has denied the rumour that HP will release a new version to compete. "The rumours of HP-UX 11.ie (Internet Edition) are a complete fabrication"
In britain, recently, some foreign geezers covered themselves in petrol over and lit the human torch. In front of some foreign embassy. It appeared on the BBC, and national radio stations.
Do you even know who they were? Or what the cause was? Did anything change?
Slashdot Mirror
"but should MS be allowed to trademark a common everyday word, one used to describe not only their product, but all similar products."
Certainly. If a word is used to describe a generic type of product it could not be registered.
At the time it was registered, "Windows" was capable of distinguising a specific product (an operating system) from others in the market. I haven't personally seen any evidence that Windows has become a generic trade name for operating systems. When people refer to it, they refer to a particular operating system. So, the trade mark would seem (IMHO) to be valid.
IANAL, YMMV, I-Am-English-And-Can-Only-Talk-About-English-Law-A s-A-Layman warnings:
In England, you (a)wouldn't be able to copyright a name, and (b) wouldn't be able to trade mark a phrase that was sufficiently close to another trade mark to mislead.
The use of a Registered Trade Mark is to protect your investment in a brand name. If Lindows is close enough to Windows for someone to mistake the two - or to think that Microsoft is endorsing the product - then it would be illegal to use it under trade mark law. Even if these conditions aren't met, the use of a trade name might (and probably would in this case) be prevented by the common law offence of "passing off".
Should change it to " under "
"Your freedom to extend your arm extends to the beginning of my nose"
I would say that freedom of expression ends when it will (not "might" or "could") cause significent real harm to an innocent individual. Thus pr0n featuring and bought by willing people should be covered by freedom of expression; pr0n featuring unwilling victims or forced on other people who are not willing to watch should *not* be convered by freedom of expression. Dito bomb making (but not drug making, since this does not harm anyone directly who is not willing to be harm).
To my mind, restricting the information available to a child comes in under "parental responsibility" not "judicial responsibility".
the production of pr0n is another matter, of course - where judicial control is warranted for underage individuals.
And how much of that was spent by the government? And how much of that was spent on microsoft products? And how much of the remaining amount is actually at threat, considering most of the licenses will be long term, and the cost of switching legacy systems to Linux would be prohibitive?
Erm, Just how much Microsoft software does brazil (as a nation) actually buy? (as supposed to "rip-off")*. And how much does it cost to localize Microsoft software to Brazil?
The majority of Microsoft profits have always come from the US. And they probably always will
* yeah, Brazil isn't a particularly bad offender, compared to China, hong Kong, etc.
The directors of PivX Solutions have just retired to live a life of luxury in Redmond.
Data Protection Act 1998:
The law has been tightened to require the use of a please *Do* sell my personal data. Even then, the opt in has only limited validity ( you can't sell the data for a purpose other than specified in the form. So, you can't sell info from a credit card application to p*rn'r'us. )
So, you won't consider leaving your job for money unless they offer a lot ;)
"does Delphi still require you to write in Pascal"
Nope. It requires you to write object pascal. Could be worse. Could be Modula-2;)
"No time like now to take up Python again."
Python's OK as well. As is Java, Perl, C, C++, and the variety of others. All I was saying is that if you want to write in a windows-style tool, you can in linux.
"Windows goes by much quicker."
It depends. If you are generating PC forms, then Delphi / Kylix has to be the way to go... and is just as easy to develop as VB.
If you are trying to write applications in C/C++ you have only yourself to blame;)
"is the Philadelphia School District selling out to Microsoft really the only way to achieve this?"
i sure wish my local district had the chance to sell out for $40+ million dollars.
MS isn't the only real OS out there... but it also isn't the total heap of [unsayable] that some people on slashdot seem to think.
.Net, Delphi, C++ Shell Script, or ASP depending on what is best for the customer. I use the OS that is best for the particular task. There IS not true OS. There IS no true programming language, technique or methedology. Sheesh!
Yes, it does have security holes. And yes, microsoft does fix them when it can. Linux has security holes, and people fix them when they can.
As for the people who keep on going on about languages: I program in C, Corba, VB, Pascal, perl, VB6,
Wine is good because it gives users a false sence of security. They get the Linux thingie, and press button, and they can use the same programs they used in windows.
What they failed to realise is that after a few years, the new software in windows will start to require Microsoft Servers (tm) using Microsoft Fuzzy Logic(tm)(RIP) and they'll be forced into either using the native linux applications, or paying bill the banker $500 a license for a piece of software that crashes every two seconds. They will use native linux, since they'll have got over the fright by then.
"They have come up with a software program that models a computer user's behavior and gives the user advice, corrects his errors or saves files according to the user's own logic"
This assumes to luser has logic.
could be worse...
const int SIXTY = 60.2; const int TWENTY_FOUR = 23;
I'm not from SCO, and i don't necessarily agree with the law suit. But (despite the fact i'll be modded to -8;) I'll try to reply to your questions
How do you address claims that SCO's demonstrated evidence so far is not theirs to copyright!
We are going to court to prove this. In any case, whether the work is our copyright or not is not in question. What is important is whether the work was in the public domain, and whether IBM failed to honour an agreement on confidentiality of code.
Nobody has answered the questions about the four kernal modules origin and algorithms being textbook common knowledge - in whole or in part. Why is this considered IP?
All knowledge that can be protected under the law is IP. What is in question is whether the original knowledge was distributed legitimately. We believe it was not.
Why did SCO keep distributing the GPL'd code while putting out press releases?
This is irrelevant. What is in question is whether the code that IBM distributed was done so legally. The distribution of legitimately GPL'd code is not in question. SCO can do that like any other organisation or person, as long as it keeps the conditions of the GPL.
Why does SCO make use of many many GPL'd tools for their own product?
See the above answer.
Why does SCO [threaten to] spread this lawsuit out to Linux users instead of only IBM's copyright infringement case?
Anyone who uses infringing code is commiting a copyright violation. As a management, we have responsibility to our shareholders to maximise the value of the company. This requires us to ensure that we are paid for our products, even if to do so we have to sue illegitimate users. This is the case for any organisation.
How is SCO planning a business model around a licensed copy of Linux when it will be quickly obsolete once the full body of evidence is released? By continuing to license and produce excellent intellectual property.
What are your definitions of "derivative works" in this case? Would future version of Linux without any SCO IP be within those bounds?
The law is quite clear on this point. Look it up;)
Why are the true numbers of lost existing customers for SCO due directly to their adopting a "free" Linux alternative? How are they calculating damages?
The number of users of the affected distributions is a start. We then times the average licensing cost by the number of users of those distributions (defined by downloads from mirror sites.)
Can SCO provide the complete code references to things it DID contribute to Linux (as SCO or Caldera) and thus differentiate between given and stolen? Yes. Whether we will or not, is a different matter;)
And finally, SCO is still hoping for a settlement with IBM.
I bet they are;)
... We can only hope that the critical control software isn't written in VB.
...
Tester: Looks like there's a critical error in this program
Programmer: It'll take me two days to fix it.
manager:Do it in ten minutes.
programmer: hm on error resume next. OK, done. Administrator:We need a new firewall program
manager:I thought we got one only last decade
administrator: We did, but
And in the next Episode, Kaboom!
Even at the senior developer level, there's too much compromising and too much "wiring code" to make most PhD's happy; and their tendency to pursue elegance at the expense of expedience no matter what the situation can slow everybody else down too.
Hm. having known several PhD's at work in development positions in the UK, I would say that PhD's are no more likely to write elegant solutions than BSc's or NVQ's.
I'm a part-time PhD student, working full time, and have been described as a hacker by almost everyone I've worked with. Expedience chosen at every opportunity;)
A MS basher is someone who believes that half the bugs belong to MS. A MS apologist is someone who believes half the bugs belong to somebody else.
... And a realist is someone who believes that it's all bill gates falt.
Hey! you spelled 'anaspeptic' wrong. It's 'anaespeptic'. D*mn tou and your incorrect American Spealing! ;)
In other news, Bill Gates rebuts rumours of a Red Hat release seven. "Windows is already at release 2003, and we will soon release 2005 (planned for 2007). This shows how much more mature Windows is compared to our Linux alternatives." A spokesman from HP has declined to make any comment, and has denied the rumour that HP will release a new version to compete. "The rumours of HP-UX 11.ie (Internet Edition) are a complete fabrication"
In britain, recently, some foreign geezers covered themselves in petrol over and lit the human torch. In front of some foreign embassy. It appeared on the BBC, and national radio stations.
Do you even know who they were? Or what the cause was? Did anything change?
A nice theory, but no cigar.
The obvious choice is to minimise the risk by buying SCO put options or selling futures in sco.