Verizon will assume something like 4 billion in MCI debt that they are still trying to pay off. Doesn't seem like a smart deal for Verizon.
Assuming that much debt is a problem. OTOH, Verizon gains millions (exact number?) of consumer customers and thousands of business customers. It also eliminates a competitor.
All in all, a very smart deal for Verizon. It's just very bad for those of us that live in Verizon's territory. Good thing that I have the choice of different carriers (for now).
p.I disagree. Note that the Plain Dealer may not be aware that their material is being used in this manner. If that is the case, then their lack of complaint may be more because they aren't aware of it. And, since (I think) Roland's web server is located in Europe, how much effort would it take for the PD to enforce US Copyright?
Thanks for the link. And, while it i strue that I am not qualified to make a legal judgement, I do believe that the text of the Stanford link backs up (most) of what I have been saying. IMO, Roland's usage is not "fair".
His use is a commercial use. He receives money from Blogads. Copying and providing proper attribution of an article for a college report is fair use. Commercial use on a blog is not.
You may not in any way make commercial or other unauthorized use, by publication, re-transmission, distribution, performance, caching, or otherwise, of material obtained through the Service, except as permitted by the Copyright Act or other law or as expressly permitted in writintg by this Agreement, Service Provider or the Service.
Now for the million dollar question: Does Roland have expressed written permission from Clevelend.com and the hundreds of other sites he copies into his blog?
The AC's links to the Mansfield Tourism Bureau (MTB) do not violate copyright law because they are "links". The require the reader to click on them to go to the originating site.
If the AC had copied and pasted the text from the MTB site into his/her slashdot post, that could violate copyright law (if the MTB had indeed copyrighted their material). Note that there is also the issue on whether or not an AC could receive revenue for posting MTB text onto Slashdot (highly unlikely).
As I have posted dozens of times before, Roland may be breaking various copyright rules, since he copies and pastes partial and, sometimes, whole articles from other authors onto his website. He does NOT add anything to the articles, he just pastes the entire text into his own site. Many sites specifically state in their policies that their articles may NOT be copied for commercial purposes without written permission.
OTOH, Slashdot, does not copy entire articles, it collects links to the original site. The original author can then receive any revenue, as is their right.
My company already has a plan and fully intends to move to Linux. Unfortunately, as my post indicates, moving all of our employees and all of our applications will take a long time. As of June, 2004, we were shooting for 18 months. At this point, I think we will miss that deadline.
In short, the reality of this migration is smacking us right in the face.
Thanks. Now, can you explain how my company is to quikly move all of thousands of employees and all of our internal Windows-based applications to redhat in the next 24 hours?
You are correct, of course. Although I think you did conveniently skip the Chirac quote about Saddam "probably" having weapons.
What I should have typed, instead, is the folks in the West Wing were the (almost) the only folks in the world to start a war without absolute proof. The folks in the West Wing were the only folks in the world willing to go to war for preventive reasons.
Since Kim Jong Il, in all probability, has nukes, I am finding the West Wing's position on his WMD's to be more than a bit hypocritical. (And, yes, I do know that Kim Jong Il could theoretically put a mushroom cloud over Beijing, Seoul and/or Tokyo whereas Saddam never had that capability).
Actually, only one group of people 'knew' that Saddam had WMD's. And, those people happen to populate the West Wing of the White House. Remember, Colin Powell had to testify before the UN on the 'proof' of the WMD's, and the UN still didn't buy into the 'proof'.
In the case of North Korea, I imagine if, last year, you asked any Intelligence Agency in the world about North Korea and nukes, you would have received a positive response.
Slashdot Mirror
Among the others, MS should definitely include the Abe Vigoda Status extension in IE7.
Will all you Firefox users now be quiet? Oh, they are talking about me, as well?
Geez, must we always bash Micro$oft? Oh, wait, this is Slashdot. Nevermind.
Verizon's service could get worse? Is that even possible?
Assuming that much debt is a problem. OTOH, Verizon gains millions (exact number?) of consumer customers and thousands of business customers. It also eliminates a competitor.
All in all, a very smart deal for Verizon. It's just very bad for those of us that live in Verizon's territory. Good thing that I have the choice of different carriers (for now).
Shhh. Don't tell my boss that I was /.ing at work....
Today, for the first time with any Roland post, I actually considered the "snitch" route. I passed on that option.
And, what makes you think I even voted for Clinton? Did I ever express any sentiment in favor of Clinton in my post?
Baseless?
p.I disagree. Note that the Plain Dealer may not be aware that their material is being used in this manner. If that is the case, then their lack of complaint may be more because they aren't aware of it. And, since (I think) Roland's web server is located in Europe, how much effort would it take for the PD to enforce US Copyright?I think that this may answer your questions.
Thanks for the link. And, while it i strue that I am not qualified to make a legal judgement, I do believe that the text of the Stanford link backs up (most) of what I have been saying. IMO, Roland's usage is not "fair".
His use is a commercial use. He receives money from Blogads. Copying and providing proper attribution of an article for a college report is fair use. Commercial use on a blog is not.
Roland is permitted to 'link' to the Plain Dealer. He is NOT permitted to copy and paste the text of the article.
Here is the user policy from www.clevleand.com:
Now for the million dollar question: Does Roland have expressed written permission from Clevelend.com and the hundreds of other sites he copies into his blog?
The AC's links to the Mansfield Tourism Bureau (MTB) do not violate copyright law because they are "links". The require the reader to click on them to go to the originating site.
If the AC had copied and pasted the text from the MTB site into his/her slashdot post, that could violate copyright law (if the MTB had indeed copyrighted their material). Note that there is also the issue on whether or not an AC could receive revenue for posting MTB text onto Slashdot (highly unlikely).
As I have posted dozens of times before, Roland may be breaking various copyright rules, since he copies and pastes partial and, sometimes, whole articles from other authors onto his website. He does NOT add anything to the articles, he just pastes the entire text into his own site. Many sites specifically state in their policies that their articles may NOT be copied for commercial purposes without written permission.
OTOH, Slashdot, does not copy entire articles, it collects links to the original site. The original author can then receive any revenue, as is their right.
There's sex on the internet? Wow! You learn something new every day.
How about "A Federation of the Willing"? Oh, wait, that's Coalition of the Willing. Never mind.
My company already has a plan and fully intends to move to Linux. Unfortunately, as my post indicates, moving all of our employees and all of our applications will take a long time. As of June, 2004, we were shooting for 18 months. At this point, I think we will miss that deadline.
In short, the reality of this migration is smacking us right in the face.
I guess Santa isn't Dancing anymore.
Thanks. Now, can you explain how my company is to quikly move all of thousands of employees and all of our internal Windows-based applications to redhat in the next 24 hours?
You are correct, of course. Although I think you did conveniently skip the Chirac quote about Saddam "probably" having weapons.
What I should have typed, instead, is the folks in the West Wing were the (almost) the only folks in the world to start a war without absolute proof. The folks in the West Wing were the only folks in the world willing to go to war for preventive reasons.
Since Kim Jong Il, in all probability, has nukes, I am finding the West Wing's position on his WMD's to be more than a bit hypocritical. (And, yes, I do know that Kim Jong Il could theoretically put a mushroom cloud over Beijing, Seoul and/or Tokyo whereas Saddam never had that capability).
Because the threat of flattening the place actually can be more powerful than if he actually did flatten the place.
Actually, only one group of people 'knew' that Saddam had WMD's. And, those people happen to populate the West Wing of the White House. Remember, Colin Powell had to testify before the UN on the 'proof' of the WMD's, and the UN still didn't buy into the 'proof'.
In the case of North Korea, I imagine if, last year, you asked any Intelligence Agency in the world about North Korea and nukes, you would have received a positive response.
Please do. I need a new corporate laptop.