But the Windows team leader would fire up his GUI prior to battle, only to find it redirected to whenusav.com. After hours of scouring his registry to remove the new "homepage" he'd just give up and run AdAware.
By then, of course, Linuxaurus would have taken his market share.
wow.. that episode was a fucking ripoff of the original series where Spock attemps to mind-meld with the the inorganic (silicon-based) life form affectionately known as the "pizza-monster" ('cause it looked like a Round Table experiment gone horribly wrong).
Now that I've admitted I know all that, I'm forced to kill myself...
I never once said that Lindows/Linspire did anything on purpose or with malice aforethought. What I did say was that *intention* is immaterial to whether or not they are responsible for their actions.
If Linspire misappropriated the artwork without regard for licensing, they are evil. If they merely failed to adhere to commonly accepted professional practice, then they are lazy and/or stupid.
You take your pick of the above choices; I really don't care. Again, I really don't have much of an opinion about Linspire as a company. However, in this case they did something wrong out of malice or poor judgement. Whatever they can do to atone for that is left to another discussion I don't care to have.
The fact remains that Linspire fucked up, and you are saying that people are mean and unfair for saying Linspire fucked up.
They let you out of 3rd Grade with your stunning lack of reading comprehension?
Let's go over it one final time:
1. When using someone else's work in your own commercial product (in this case, a Flash animation advertisement using another artist's work) it is your responsibility to ensure that appropriate permission is granted from the copyright holder.
2. In the instant case, this apparently did not happen. Whether it was intentional or pure oversight, it was a misappropriation of another's work.
3. Linspire gets flack for failing to gain appropriate permissions.
There is no bias. The "unfairness" was on the part of Linspire for failing to contact the copyright holder for permission (which probably would have been granted anyway). It doesn't matter whether Microsoft did this or Eric Raymond did this. The employee(s) at Linspire failed to follow a fundamental rule of creating commercial work utilizing outside artwork. That is why they are getting flack.
By your logic, if I run through a red light and kill a family of four, I should be excused because nobody wanted it to happen that way.
Thanks anyway, your lack of logic and reading comprehension is noted and logged.
Whether it was contracted or done in-house is, again, immaterial. They (Linspire) bear the responsibility for its use.
And if someone who creates commercial presentations for a living (whether contracted or in-house) doesn't know enough to at least do a cursory check on copyright limitations for included works, that person better be looking for another job (or a stable of good attorneys).
Checking the license for included works is common practice...
And I have no impulse to slam, slander, or troll Linspire. I really don't care much about them one way or another. I'm just remarking on what appears to me to be either incredible laziness and stupidity or incredible rudeness on their part.
Your immediate impulse to defend Linspire says to me that you probably work for them (actually, it doesn't, but your last line was an equally valid argument).
I deal with this all the time when someone in the company creates this gr00vy little presentation with artwork and/or audio clips and wants to use it in a public keynote or pop it up on the public website.
It doesn't take an understanding of IP and Copyright. All it takes is to contact the original author (or appropriate copyright holder) and ask permission. 5 minutes spent surfing around (or even Googling) would have provided enough information for the creator of that Flash piece to understand he/she had an easily-surmountable problem with regards to the images used.
It appears that even that small professional courtesy was overlooked in this case. That's bad.
And whether or not Linspire is actually making money is immaterial; they are a commercial entity using someone else's work without permission in pursuit of a commercial goal.
Titan directly orbits Saturn, making it a moon of a planet (Saturn). The Earth directly orbits the Sun, making it a planet (with its own moon). Pluto directly orbits the Sun, making it a planet. It's companion, Charon, directly orbits it, making Charon the moon of Pluto.
Relative sizes aren't the issue -- the center of the orbit of the body is.
The crying shame is that they only leased (not sold) them and when GM ended the lease program they forced the drivers to return the cars (even though the majority repeatedly appealed to GM to outright sell them the cars).
Unfortunately, if the reader has "Display Link Domains" set to on (as I do), it interferes with the readability of the sentence. I originally only had "Cartman" linked, but didn't like the way it looked (so close to the end of the sentence), so linked the whole thing, not expecting some pompous ass to make snide remarks.
Insofar as the "sopho" reference that both of you so painfully missed, here's a link you two might find illuminating...
actually, having just seen the movie, I can tell you that the comment bears no resemblence to anything that happens in the movie. It's even more fucked up than that (dude, it's TARANTINO...).
Go see the flick, safe in the knowledge that it was not spoiled....
The items purchased upon which DirecTV was basing its case have myriad uses, only one of which is actual unauthorized descrambling of DirecTV's signal. This would be like determining that since you own a car, you are automatically guilty of vehicular homicide.
Now, having one of these devices is a good start in the investigation, but more proof needs to be presented in order for DirecTV to have a case. Their shyster law firm basically set up an assembly-line operation for pressuring unsavvy victims into giving themselves up. A single letter on attorney letterhead is enough to get them to cease action against an individual (absent other proof such as a "subscription" to services from certain dealers in hacked cards or the software thereon known as "3M" scripts).
...if I guy had been stuck in orbit for a decade, he'd have lost so much bone and muscle mass that bringing him home suddenly would be a death sentence.
You should take a read of the GPL again. It does not stand opposite of Capitalism.
In fact, a good argument could be made that the GPL enhances Capitalism by stimulating real innovation through competition.
The explosion of computer technology in the 70s and 80s was largely due to people working together and sharing their ideas.
When all the cards are on the table, it's easy to see who the innovators are apart from the hangers-on. The innovators will make tons of cash, and will raise the technological bar for the next round of innovators, while not retarding their growth and progress (as we are seeing in today's Corporate environment).
I'd flesh this out more, but I'm in a hurry. I'm sure you get the idea.
Slashdot Mirror
But the Windows team leader would fire up his GUI prior to battle, only to find it redirected to whenusav.com. After hours of scouring his registry to remove the new "homepage" he'd just give up and run AdAware.
By then, of course, Linuxaurus would have taken his market share.
Woah there Smellysaurus.. don't breath fire too close to that KC-10 in the background. A few thousand gallons of JP-3 makes a nice big fireball...
wow.. that episode was a fucking ripoff of the original series where Spock attemps to mind-meld with the the inorganic (silicon-based) life form affectionately known as the "pizza-monster" ('cause it looked like a Round Table experiment gone horribly wrong).
Now that I've admitted I know all that, I'm forced to kill myself...
Once more, this time I'll try to be more clear...
I never once said that Lindows/Linspire did anything on purpose or with malice aforethought. What I did say was that *intention* is immaterial to whether or not they are responsible for their actions.
If Linspire misappropriated the artwork without regard for licensing, they are evil. If they merely failed to adhere to commonly accepted professional practice, then they are lazy and/or stupid.
You take your pick of the above choices; I really don't care. Again, I really don't have much of an opinion about Linspire as a company. However, in this case they did something wrong out of malice or poor judgement. Whatever they can do to atone for that is left to another discussion I don't care to have.
The fact remains that Linspire fucked up, and you are saying that people are mean and unfair for saying Linspire fucked up.
And that makes you wrong.
They let you out of 3rd Grade with your stunning lack of reading comprehension?
Let's go over it one final time:
1. When using someone else's work in your own commercial product (in this case, a Flash animation advertisement using another artist's work) it is your responsibility to ensure that appropriate permission is granted from the copyright holder.
2. In the instant case, this apparently did not happen. Whether it was intentional or pure oversight, it was a misappropriation of another's work.
3. Linspire gets flack for failing to gain appropriate permissions.
There is no bias. The "unfairness" was on the part of Linspire for failing to contact the copyright holder for permission (which probably would have been granted anyway). It doesn't matter whether Microsoft did this or Eric Raymond did this. The employee(s) at Linspire failed to follow a fundamental rule of creating commercial work utilizing outside artwork. That is why they are getting flack.
By your logic, if I run through a red light and kill a family of four, I should be excused because nobody wanted it to happen that way.
Thanks anyway, your lack of logic and reading comprehension is noted and logged.
...the testing grounds for "Carnivore II".
No, I'm not going to "give them time to react" because this should not have happened in the first place.
Whether it was contracted or done in-house is, again, immaterial. They (Linspire) bear the responsibility for its use.
And if someone who creates commercial presentations for a living (whether contracted or in-house) doesn't know enough to at least do a cursory check on copyright limitations for included works, that person better be looking for another job (or a stable of good attorneys).
Checking the license for included works is common practice...
And I have no impulse to slam, slander, or troll Linspire. I really don't care much about them one way or another. I'm just remarking on what appears to me to be either incredible laziness and stupidity or incredible rudeness on their part.
Your immediate impulse to defend Linspire says to me that you probably work for them (actually, it doesn't, but your last line was an equally valid argument).
"Due"
"Diligence"
I deal with this all the time when someone in the company creates this gr00vy little presentation with artwork and/or audio clips and wants to use it in a public keynote or pop it up on the public website.
It doesn't take an understanding of IP and Copyright. All it takes is to contact the original author (or appropriate copyright holder) and ask permission. 5 minutes spent surfing around (or even Googling) would have provided enough information for the creator of that Flash piece to understand he/she had an easily-surmountable problem with regards to the images used.
It appears that even that small professional courtesy was overlooked in this case. That's bad.
And whether or not Linspire is actually making money is immaterial; they are a commercial entity using someone else's work without permission in pursuit of a commercial goal.
I'll buy it. Will they take my VALinux stock certificates in trade?
Titan directly orbits Saturn, making it a moon of a planet (Saturn). The Earth directly orbits the Sun, making it a planet (with its own moon). Pluto directly orbits the Sun, making it a planet. It's companion, Charon, directly orbits it, making Charon the moon of Pluto.
Relative sizes aren't the issue -- the center of the orbit of the body is.
Air Force uses an F5 variant called the T-38. You see the Shuttle pilots flying these around, and they are used as the chase planes on landing.
Good aircraft. They are supersonic, nimble, stable, and are good for teaching multi-engine techniques.
I'll save you the trouble.
You have this luxury 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, 365 days a year. Find a human to do that.
I have one of these. I call it "wife".
I'm sure it happens a lot in +/- 5 degrees Latitude..
They don't call them The Doldrums for nothing...
Someone already did.
The crying shame is that they only leased (not sold) them and when GM ended the lease program they forced the drivers to return the cars (even though the majority repeatedly appealed to GM to outright sell them the cars).
Mr. Valenti, you really shouldn't do personal surfing at work. After all, that's "stealing"...
Unfortunately, if the reader has "Display Link Domains" set to on (as I do), it interferes with the readability of the sentence. I originally only had "Cartman" linked, but didn't like the way it looked (so close to the end of the sentence), so linked the whole thing, not expecting some pompous ass to make snide remarks.
Insofar as the "sopho" reference that both of you so painfully missed, here's a link you two might find illuminating...
Please suck my ass, you sophomore. The link was in reference to who "Cartman" was, in case the reader had never experienced South Park.
Please learn and understand relational concepts before popping off. Thanks.
...what happened to Cartman's father.
actually, having just seen the movie, I can tell you that the comment bears no resemblence to anything that happens in the movie. It's even more fucked up than that (dude, it's TARANTINO...).
Go see the flick, safe in the knowledge that it was not spoiled....
The items purchased upon which DirecTV was basing its case have myriad uses, only one of which is actual unauthorized descrambling of DirecTV's signal. This would be like determining that since you own a car, you are automatically guilty of vehicular homicide.
Now, having one of these devices is a good start in the investigation, but more proof needs to be presented in order for DirecTV to have a case. Their shyster law firm basically set up an assembly-line operation for pressuring unsavvy victims into giving themselves up. A single letter on attorney letterhead is enough to get them to cease action against an individual (absent other proof such as a "subscription" to services from certain dealers in hacked cards or the software thereon known as "3M" scripts).
...if I guy had been stuck in orbit for a decade, he'd have lost so much bone and muscle mass that bringing him home suddenly would be a death sentence.
You should take a read of the GPL again. It does not stand opposite of Capitalism.
In fact, a good argument could be made that the GPL enhances Capitalism by stimulating real innovation through competition.
The explosion of computer technology in the 70s and 80s was largely due to people working together and sharing their ideas.
When all the cards are on the table, it's easy to see who the innovators are apart from the hangers-on. The innovators will make tons of cash, and will raise the technological bar for the next round of innovators, while not retarding their growth and progress (as we are seeing in today's Corporate environment).
I'd flesh this out more, but I'm in a hurry. I'm sure you get the idea.
So it's a CFO?
That doesn't deplete the ozone; just your bank account, while denying you headcount...