This just goes to show you that this has nothing to do with "intellectual property" and everything to do with money.
Well of course, and the RAII has not really said any different. Sure, they say they are protecting their IP, but why? Because they say (and this is without question true) it affects their profits. According to the RAII, if you steal their member's music, their members are deprived of the profit that they would otherwise make when you bought the CD.
I honestly don't think this can be disputed. What can is if you would have bought to CD to begin with.
The idea that you should be able to download music you own is really a silly subterfuge. If you own it, burn it to a CD and play it on your computer. It is highly suspect for someone with 300 or 400 titles on their box to insist they own all the tunes on CD anyway...
Re:Big surprise, another postive book review
on
Perl 6 Essentials
·
· Score: 0, Flamebait
I predict that the parent will be modded "troll", as in: How dare you slight the wise editors of Slashdot...
In both big (USA) government and big commerce, decisions to buy a specific platform are not made by technically savvy IT folks. They are made buy suits that interact with high level snake oil salesmen. If this latest issue where brought to the attention of the people responsible for signing up Homeland Security to the M$ bandwagon, they would scratch their heads and go back to their solitaire game. It's like the person who buys the blender with 20 settings (frappe, liquefy, smoothie, crush, chunk, blend, whip...), not knowing the machine only has 4 speeds.
Linus doesn't care about corporate suits, and has always maintained this.
Linus may not care about corporate suits, but if you don't care to see M$ and SCO roll Linux up, stuff it in a pipe, and smoke it, you better.
By the way, you are a troll.
From the MSN story:
Googlehole No. 1: All Shopping, All the Time. If you're searching for something that can be sold online, Google's top results skew very heavily toward stores, and away from general information. Search for "flowers," and more than 90 percent of the top results are online florists.
MSN: All Shopping, All the Time. If you're searching for something that can be sold online, MSN's top results skew very heavily toward stores, and away from general information. Search for "flowers," and more than 90 percent of the top results are online florists.
Googlehole No. 2: Skewed Synonyms. Search for "apple" on Google, and you have to troll through a couple pages of results before you get anything not directly related to Apple Computer
Now, go to MSN and type in the word "apple". You have to troll through a couple pages of results before you get anything not directly related to Apple Computer.
Googlehole No. 3: Book Learning. Google is beginning to have a subtle, but noticeable effect on research. More and more scholarly publications are putting up their issues in PDF format, which Google indexes as though they were traditional Web pages.
The WWW is beginning to have a subtle, but noticeable effect on research. More and more scholarly publications are putting up their issues in PDF format, which most search engines indexe as though they were traditional Web pages.
McBride made it clear on that interview yesterday that 2.2 kernel is clean.
OK, then that kind of narrows it, right? Based on this, it's a bit of a stretch to say we have "no idea" what the offending code is. There is at least SOME idea, and if 2.2 is "clean" then it might be wise to go from there?
Unfortunately, we will have to wait until April 2005 before we know exactly how far the term 'derivative work' encompasses. Is merely seeing Unix code enough to make any additional coding a derivative work? I say no, SCO is saying yes.
I don't think Linux can afford to wait until 2005. The way corporate suits think, SCO will (and this is their aim) scare them away from Linux forever.
In the end, (puts tinfoil hat on) I think we will see that there is some deal between M$ and SCO. I think in the end, we will see M$ gobble up SCO, but not before M$ completely whores out SCO. Have you ever been to Red West? It's the way these people operate (removes tinfoil hat).
I know the parent will be modded troll or flamebait, but really, I keep hearing that if SCO prevails, the offending code can be replaced quickly. Why not replace it NOW?
Wrong answer. *They* themselves distributed a Linux kernel, complete with source up until a week or so after they filed the suit, IIRC. If it was infringeing then, then they have relased whatever code might be in there under the terms of the GNU General Public License.
I don't think this will hold up. On this point I suspect a judge will side with SCO if they claim that the copyright is invalid because they where not fully aware at the time of the scope of the offending code content.
We hear this GNU/GPL argument all the time here, but it's not as simple as that. There are lots of scenarios that would invalidate this idea.
By the way, take note that not one of the big players in this fiasco even brings this up, they know that in this case the GNU/GPL is questionable and probably not enforceable.
I assume an immediately new kernel would be released and everyone would move to a completely "clean" kernel.
I can't understand why that hasn't happened already, but what do I know?
Well, hopefully the smart guys on the Kernel team are thinking about this already, not running in circles under some dilusion that the issue will not come up.
I mean, why even wait? Chop SCO's head off now and just change any "questionable" code... There has been much talk of this "IF" SCO prevails, just do it "NOW".
The parent is flaimbait. Why is it modded "Insightful"? Could it be because it is anti M$?/.'s double standard is showing.
In other news, PCWorld.com sites Mozilla in its "Best of 2003" feature... "The browser wars may be over, but browser innovation isn't. For five years, the open-source community has hacked away on Mozilla, a free program that is now stable, speedy, standards-compliant, and full of useful features. Unlike Internet Explorer, Mozilla blocks pop-ups with a built-in tool, manages cookies and passwords site-by-site, and includes both an IRC chat client and a powerful mail reader with intelligent spam filtering. You can surf multiple sites in one tabbed browser window (as you can in Opera, another alternative Web browser we like)."
My point is that it is NOT just a space plane. It travals through regular air space as well. And so, should be designed to take the possibilities of impact that occure at lower altitudes. Please pull your head out of your ass.
There have been consistent stories in the press about a certain slack in attention to detail at NASA of late. And, as an Air Force guy, I wonder how they could design a wing leading edge that can't take a hit from some hard foam, we get bird-strike all the time!
Even a C-17 can take a 30 pound goose at 400 knots...
I think it's time that FSF et al actually court a lawsuit to test strength of the GPL out, put an end to backseat sideline quarterbacking on it's legality.
Slashdot Mirror
This just goes to show you that this has nothing to do with "intellectual property" and everything to do with money.
Well of course, and the RAII has not really said any different. Sure, they say they are protecting their IP, but why? Because they say (and this is without question true) it affects their profits. According to the RAII, if you steal their member's music, their members are deprived of the profit that they would otherwise make when you bought the CD.
I honestly don't think this can be disputed. What can is if you would have bought to CD to begin with.
The idea that you should be able to download music you own is really a silly subterfuge. If you own it, burn it to a CD and play it on your computer. It is highly suspect for someone with 300 or 400 titles on their box to insist they own all the tunes on CD anyway...
I predict that the parent will be modded "troll", as in: How dare you slight the wise editors of Slashdot...
Beware of Slashes name and title dropping... Why when I was the CTO of the Fortune 500 company, we evaluated Linux 9...
In both big (USA) government and big commerce, decisions to buy a specific platform are not made by technically savvy IT folks. They are made buy suits that interact with high level snake oil salesmen. If this latest issue where brought to the attention of the people responsible for signing up Homeland Security to the M$ bandwagon, they would scratch their heads and go back to their solitaire game. It's like the person who buys the blender with 20 settings (frappe, liquefy, smoothie, crush, chunk, blend, whip...), not knowing the machine only has 4 speeds.
YOU may not want to implement it, but pay a visit to usnet, you will see it in WIDE use.
Mozilla.org STILL has no plans to support yEnc encoding. Wonder if they have some deal with the Agent people.
And if the students' life savings get sucked up by the RIAA, how will they pay for school?
Linus doesn't care about corporate suits, and has always maintained this.
Linus may not care about corporate suits, but if you don't care to see M$ and SCO roll Linux up, stuff it in a pipe, and smoke it, you better. By the way, you are a troll.
From the MSN story: Googlehole No. 1: All Shopping, All the Time. If you're searching for something that can be sold online, Google's top results skew very heavily toward stores, and away from general information. Search for "flowers," and more than 90 percent of the top results are online florists.
MSN: All Shopping, All the Time. If you're searching for something that can be sold online, MSN's top results skew very heavily toward stores, and away from general information. Search for "flowers," and more than 90 percent of the top results are online florists.
Googlehole No. 2: Skewed Synonyms. Search for "apple" on Google, and you have to troll through a couple pages of results before you get anything not directly related to Apple Computer
Now, go to MSN and type in the word "apple". You have to troll through a couple pages of results before you get anything not directly related to Apple Computer.
Googlehole No. 3: Book Learning. Google is beginning to have a subtle, but noticeable effect on research. More and more scholarly publications are putting up their issues in PDF format, which Google indexes as though they were traditional Web pages.
The WWW is beginning to have a subtle, but noticeable effect on research. More and more scholarly publications are putting up their issues in PDF format, which most search engines indexe as though they were traditional Web pages.
Fine, but if you want to know about tulips, enter "tulips".
McBride made it clear on that interview yesterday that 2.2 kernel is clean.
OK, then that kind of narrows it, right? Based on this, it's a bit of a stretch to say we have "no idea" what the offending code is. There is at least SOME idea, and if 2.2 is "clean" then it might be wise to go from there?
Unfortunately, we will have to wait until April 2005 before we know exactly how far the term 'derivative work' encompasses. Is merely seeing Unix code enough to make any additional coding a derivative work? I say no, SCO is saying yes.
I don't think Linux can afford to wait until 2005. The way corporate suits think, SCO will (and this is their aim) scare them away from Linux forever.
In the end, (puts tinfoil hat on) I think we will see that there is some deal between M$ and SCO. I think in the end, we will see M$ gobble up SCO, but not before M$ completely whores out SCO. Have you ever been to Red West? It's the way these people operate (removes tinfoil hat).
I know the parent will be modded troll or flamebait, but really, I keep hearing that if SCO prevails, the offending code can be replaced quickly. Why not replace it NOW?
Arn't you the "upper mid-level management" from Corel? See, this is what went wrong at Corel, all the managers are surfing the net for porn!
Wrong answer. *They* themselves distributed a Linux kernel, complete with source up until a week or so after they filed the suit, IIRC. If it was infringeing then, then they have relased whatever code might be in there under the terms of the GNU General Public License.
I don't think this will hold up. On this point I suspect a judge will side with SCO if they claim that the copyright is invalid because they where not fully aware at the time of the scope of the offending code content.
We hear this GNU/GPL argument all the time here, but it's not as simple as that. There are lots of scenarios that would invalidate this idea.
By the way, take note that not one of the big players in this fiasco even brings this up, they know that in this case the GNU/GPL is questionable and probably not enforceable.
Ahh, the typical comments of an Anonymous Coward: Penis envey...
I assume an immediately new kernel would be released and everyone would move to a completely "clean" kernel.
I can't understand why that hasn't happened already, but what do I know?
Well, hopefully the smart guys on the Kernel team are thinking about this already, not running in circles under some dilusion that the issue will not come up.
I mean, why even wait? Chop SCO's head off now and just change any "questionable" code... There has been much talk of this "IF" SCO prevails, just do it "NOW".
The parent is flaimbait. Why is it modded "Insightful"? Could it be because it is anti M$? /.'s double standard is showing.
In other news, PCWorld.com sites Mozilla in its "Best of 2003" feature... "The browser wars may be over, but browser innovation isn't. For five years, the open-source community has hacked away on Mozilla, a free program that is now stable, speedy, standards-compliant, and full of useful features. Unlike Internet Explorer, Mozilla blocks pop-ups with a built-in tool, manages cookies and passwords site-by-site, and includes both an IRC chat client and a powerful mail reader with intelligent spam filtering. You can surf multiple sites in one tabbed browser window (as you can in Opera, another alternative Web browser we like)."
Powell's World of Books has an EXCELLENT technical bookstore, and their catalog is on-line. Powells.com
You are missing my point, and no, I'm not unlear.
My point is that it is NOT just a space plane. It travals through regular air space as well. And so, should be designed to take the possibilities of impact that occure at lower altitudes. Please pull your head out of your ass.
Very good point. And consider the source. I suspect this will not actually happen, that it's just trash talk.
This is not so. The foam hit the leading edge. The leading edge, TILE FREE, failed.
There have been consistent stories in the press about a certain slack in attention to detail at NASA of late. And, as an Air Force guy, I wonder how they could design a wing leading edge that can't take a hit from some hard foam, we get bird-strike all the time! Even a C-17 can take a 30 pound goose at 400 knots...
No, I didn't realize, not being a lawyer (and my post was not a troll...)
But a legal case might be useful to the cause!
I think it's time that FSF et al actually court a lawsuit to test strength of the GPL out, put an end to backseat sideline quarterbacking on it's legality.