How can you prevent anyone from dropping an unfair lawsuit on anyone else? You can not. Sadly, our legal system strongly encourages litigation. The only thing that will prevent future lawsuits is other companies fear of doing so. SCO came after Linux because
a) they are on the fast track to bankruptcy and have nothing to lose
b) They are dumb underestimated the legal strength of opensource, much like many companies underestimate the development strengths of opensource (many folks have this problem and cannot imagine anything ever being accomplished without a huge corporate beureacracy getting involved).
The Linux community is embarassing SCO because they are tenacious and quickly debunk any SCOs claims, they have shown how willing they are to assist in finding evidence. They are out publicly bashing SCO everyday, making them look like the bad guy (which is an accurate portrayal). This case is going to show how stupid it is to challenge opensource. SCO is going to go bankrupt and any other company that ever considers getting into legal battles with opensource developers is going to think twice and make sure that they have a decent argument to stand on.
The guy was an employee of Caldera!!! Caldera was a distributer of linux. Much like Redhat and every other linux distrubution, they contributed their changes and other software under the GNU. Whether it was against their companies policy to release that code holds absolutely no weight in court. He acted on behalf of his company, and it seems that he was even authorized to do so. If I make a business decision when writing up a contract with a sub-contractor, my company cannot come back and sue me or the sub-contractor because in hindsight that desicion turned out to be a bad decision. Your analogy is a terrible analogy.
Groklaw is not really intended to be a news site. It is not there intent to be "fair and unbiased". They are out to prove that SCO does not have a case and to make the opensource community stronger by providing legal insight. Can you trust them not to lie? Probably, If their research leads to them getting involved in a court case, lying could get them in a lot of trouble. Would groklaw reveal information supporting SCOs claims if they found it? Who knows. It's highly doubtful that they could find anything supporting SCOs claims as SCO themselves haven't managed to do that. I am reasonably certain that you can probably take what Groklaw has revealed as true, they do not want to get caught in lie.
Still using kde 2.X?
Konqueror destroys Explorer both as an internet browser and as a file manager (can be split into unlimited panes, with multiple tabs as well. Add in the navigation panel and terminal emulator and you have one powerfule file manager).
Uhhh. I have crap load of FSF supported stuff on my computer that they are not coming after me for. And I got it all free! The difference is that the terms of the GPL are REASONABLE.
It is doubtful that SCO even can claim ownership to Unix at this point, but in any case, IBM was allowed to implement certain code in AIX because they paid for it.
The disputable code is the linux code, even if IBM implemented these features in Linux it may be legal. If they did not change the implementation then it should be obvious from looking at the Linux code, if they changed the implementation of the feature when putting it into linux then it is arguably not a copyright violation because it is changed.
Sometimes rewrites are good and sometimes bad. Often times when developing or expanding on somebody elses development you find that a different model works better.
I had never heard the different technological benefits of IPv6 until reading this article and it is interesting that after presenting all the details, the author had reached an entirely different conclusions.
RIAA, MPAA, peer-to-peer:
First of all, this is way out of the RIAAs and MPAAs realm of influence. ISPs have already shown that they do not care about these cartels and that they like peer-to-peer because it attracts customers to their internet services. Secondly, peer-to-peer is highly successful without IPv6 and having NAT actually increases privacy because I can go down to my local wifi zone and download stuff without being traced.
Too large a change:
Not really. As long as companies are willing to change the necessary hardware, and if IPv6 can save them money on things like travel by improving video telecon capabilities, it will happen.
Like a change from english to metric unit?:
Wrong again, The change will be transparent to Joe AOL user.
Exactly. They are way to expensive. For the price they are charging you might as well just buy your kids hammers, nails and lumber and say "here, build a real house"
I disagree with your statement that we can't destroy all life on the planet. A lot of people seem to believe in this 'Life goes on' theory. I think there reasoning is that Life has been around since the beginning of Life, therefore it must be undestructable. However it is very possible to send the Earth into some sort of positive feedback loop which worsens to the point that the planet is no longer suitable for certain mechanisms that are essential for life. I used to work in a laboratory where I studied Cytochrome C Oxidase, the terminary protein in the electron transport chain. The Protein is responsible for creating a proton gradient across a cell/mitochondria membrane which drives the production of ATP. The protein exists in some form in all species (although it has a different name and slightly different structure in bacteria). One of the lessons I learned from this is that all species have certain important balanced chemical reactions that we rely upon. If you make the environment unsuitable for these reactions (ie change in catalysts, change in concentrations) you COULD wipe out all the species on the planet.
I think some folks like yourselves just like to disagree with everyone so that you can get attention. What you said has to be one of the dumbest things I have ever seen posted on slashdot. Wiping out a species because you like to eat it is a minor loss. We could never kill off 25% of the animals on this planet by hunting them down and shooting them one at a time. Semi-intelligent people who understand the point of the article realize that this means we are on the FAST TRACK to extinction. If 25% of the species are gone in 50 years, it just does not level off, the extinctions will continue or possibly even accelerate.
Bush is too strong to vote out. He has secured the vote of Americas under-educated white trash....And why should the poor Martians have to put up with Madonna.
Don't worry, our aging population is making sure that you can't afford costly education by electing officials that will divert money from your future so that the baby boomers can retire early after only having worked 1/3 of their life.
The money saved will be well spent on prescription drugs, life support, and welfare for old people (social security).
The problem with both this and the original article is that they both look at two numbers and try to assert that because either both change or both don't that they are or are not correlated.
How many other market factors are there that should be considered?
How about someone like me. I was still buying a bunch of CDs every year until the college students started getting sued for running search engines. I now boycott buying CDs and I HOPE that it does affect the RIAAs bottom line and I hope that more ppl would put there money where there mouths are and boycott something instead of just complaining about it.
I was probably buying 10+ CDs a year. Haven't bought one now for over a year and a half.
Yea, Yea, Parents like you always find some way of rationalizing the overly protective view you take of parenting. It's easier than admitting that you may just be overly protective and will still probably be looking over your kids shoulder long into their mid-twenties.
Anybody watch 'Everybody Loves Raymond,?
HeHe, You may have crossed the line between being an involved parent and an overly protective mother hen. It's OK, I have some of those kind of parents.
This whole idea of controlling the internet from an international organization just goes to show how stupid politicians really are. In the course of their debating which probably cost millions of dollars from around the world, why wasn't one person smart enough to do some research or bring in a subject matter expert in order to determine if it is even feasible to control internet content on a global scale?
the vast majority of ALL software is rubbish. GPL or not.
Much GPL software is mistakenly assumed to be bad simply because it is obtainable before it is even close to being finished.
I do know one thing. I have never seen ANY software grow and mature at a rate like KDE has. They have really improved their package when you really stop to consider what all is included in it.
That's what I thought at first because I was thinking in the mindset of it being okay since the texts were not actually being sold and in fact that this was introduced to help sales. However, the pro blem is that there must be a contract in which amazon is paying the publisher for this privelige (of searching the full texts). If this is the case, the authors deserve some of that money since the publisher is benefiting from their work and not compensating them.
I am sure the author would apologize for informing people that there is more to OSes than what is on a PC. It just goes to show how cautious you have to be when logging on to AOL and surfing the net. Careful, you might soon end up learning that the internet and the world wide web are not one in the same.
Change the rules to suit the propaganda. When people are talking about OS', 99.44% of the time they're referring to PCs. Is it so hard to admit that Windows has huge marketshare simply because it's what has been put in front of the end user?
Uh, it looks like you said this in reply to the original post and I feel to see the propoganda either for or against any of the OS developers. Neither the slashdot or the articles promote ITRON or bash Windows.
I for one, had not knowledge of what is running on these devices, and now I am a smarter person because of this. This slashdot and article is clearly intended for that very purpose. It assumes that most people are not aware of the different embedded OSes on their electronic devices, it then informs them of the most popular of these OSes. Of course, maybe you think it would all be better off if we remained ignorant of these facts, in which case, I suggest you find a less technology oriented news/information website. Maybe news.yahoo.com or whatever news feature AOL offers.
What is obvious is that the only one here with an agenda is you, who is jumping at the oppurtunity to take cheap shots at the majority of the slashdot crowd, which in general is not a fan of Windows.
In addition to indy bands we should also be allowed to listen to anything with with a copyright over 28 years (and 14 years if the artist is deceased). That was the original length for copyright which was changed despite the fact that it clearly was not in the public good and was unconstitutional. Anybody interested in listening to those oldies that qualify should feel free to download them because they should be part of the public domain, and if it went to court and was fought, it would be a pretty much open and shut case. The constitution is pretty straight forward when it comes to making a decision on copyright extension.
A good read on the subject: http://www.onlisareinsradar.com/archives /000565.ph p
Slashdot Mirror
a) they are on the fast track to bankruptcy and have nothing to lose
b) They are dumb underestimated the legal strength of opensource, much like many companies underestimate the development strengths of opensource (many folks have this problem and cannot imagine anything ever being accomplished without a huge corporate beureacracy getting involved).
The Linux community is embarassing SCO because they are tenacious and quickly debunk any SCOs claims, they have shown how willing they are to assist in finding evidence. They are out publicly bashing SCO everyday, making them look like the bad guy (which is an accurate portrayal). This case is going to show how stupid it is to challenge opensource. SCO is going to go bankrupt and any other company that ever considers getting into legal battles with opensource developers is going to think twice and make sure that they have a decent argument to stand on.
The guy was an employee of Caldera!!! Caldera was a distributer of linux. Much like Redhat and every other linux distrubution, they contributed their changes and other software under the GNU. Whether it was against their companies policy to release that code holds absolutely no weight in court. He acted on behalf of his company, and it seems that he was even authorized to do so. If I make a business decision when writing up a contract with a sub-contractor, my company cannot come back and sue me or the sub-contractor because in hindsight that desicion turned out to be a bad decision. Your analogy is a terrible analogy.
Groklaw is not really intended to be a news site. It is not there intent to be "fair and unbiased". They are out to prove that SCO does not have a case and to make the opensource community stronger by providing legal insight. Can you trust them not to lie? Probably, If their research leads to them getting involved in a court case, lying could get them in a lot of trouble. Would groklaw reveal information supporting SCOs claims if they found it? Who knows. It's highly doubtful that they could find anything supporting SCOs claims as SCO themselves haven't managed to do that. I am reasonably certain that you can probably take what Groklaw has revealed as true, they do not want to get caught in lie.
Still using kde 2.X? Konqueror destroys Explorer both as an internet browser and as a file manager (can be split into unlimited panes, with multiple tabs as well. Add in the navigation panel and terminal emulator and you have one powerfule file manager).
screwing them by breaking the rules can be fun too though! Hint: Get a library card and an audio encoder (both free).
Uhhh. I have crap load of FSF supported stuff on my computer that they are not coming after me for. And I got it all free! The difference is that the terms of the GPL are REASONABLE.
It is doubtful that SCO even can claim ownership to Unix at this point, but in any case, IBM was allowed to implement certain code in AIX because they paid for it.
The disputable code is the linux code, even if IBM implemented these features in Linux it may be legal. If they did not change the implementation then it should be obvious from looking at the Linux code, if they changed the implementation of the feature when putting it into linux then it is arguably not a copyright violation because it is changed.
Sometimes rewrites are good and sometimes bad. Often times when developing or expanding on somebody elses development you find that a different model works better.
RIAA, MPAA, peer-to-peer:
First of all, this is way out of the RIAAs and MPAAs realm of influence. ISPs have already shown that they do not care about these cartels and that they like peer-to-peer because it attracts customers to their internet services. Secondly, peer-to-peer is highly successful without IPv6 and having NAT actually increases privacy because I can go down to my local wifi zone and download stuff without being traced.
Too large a change:
Not really. As long as companies are willing to change the necessary hardware, and if IPv6 can save them money on things like travel by improving video telecon capabilities, it will happen.
Like a change from english to metric unit?:
Wrong again, The change will be transparent to Joe AOL user.
Exactly. They are way to expensive. For the price they are charging you might as well just buy your kids hammers, nails and lumber and say "here, build a real house"
I disagree with your statement that we can't destroy all life on the planet. A lot of people seem to believe in this 'Life goes on' theory. I think there reasoning is that Life has been around since the beginning of Life, therefore it must be undestructable. However it is very possible to send the Earth into some sort of positive feedback loop which worsens to the point that the planet is no longer suitable for certain mechanisms that are essential for life. I used to work in a laboratory where I studied Cytochrome C Oxidase, the terminary protein in the electron transport chain. The Protein is responsible for creating a proton gradient across a cell/mitochondria membrane which drives the production of ATP. The protein exists in some form in all species (although it has a different name and slightly different structure in bacteria). One of the lessons I learned from this is that all species have certain important balanced chemical reactions that we rely upon. If you make the environment unsuitable for these reactions (ie change in catalysts, change in concentrations) you COULD wipe out all the species on the planet.
I think some folks like yourselves just like to disagree with everyone so that you can get attention. What you said has to be one of the dumbest things I have ever seen posted on slashdot. Wiping out a species because you like to eat it is a minor loss. We could never kill off 25% of the animals on this planet by hunting them down and shooting them one at a time. Semi-intelligent people who understand the point of the article realize that this means we are on the FAST TRACK to extinction. If 25% of the species are gone in 50 years, it just does not level off, the extinctions will continue or possibly even accelerate.
Bush is too strong to vote out. He has secured the vote of Americas under-educated white trash. ...And why should the poor Martians have to put up with Madonna.
Don't worry, our aging population is making sure that you can't afford costly education by electing officials that will divert money from your future so that the baby boomers can retire early after only having worked 1/3 of their life. The money saved will be well spent on prescription drugs, life support, and welfare for old people (social security).
The problem with both this and the original article is that they both look at two numbers and try to assert that because either both change or both don't that they are or are not correlated. How many other market factors are there that should be considered? How about someone like me. I was still buying a bunch of CDs every year until the college students started getting sued for running search engines. I now boycott buying CDs and I HOPE that it does affect the RIAAs bottom line and I hope that more ppl would put there money where there mouths are and boycott something instead of just complaining about it. I was probably buying 10+ CDs a year. Haven't bought one now for over a year and a half.
Of course, the most likely scenario: Parent: "What are you doing on the computer?" CTeenager: "Nothing"
Yea, Yea, Parents like you always find some way of rationalizing the overly protective view you take of parenting. It's easier than admitting that you may just be overly protective and will still probably be looking over your kids shoulder long into their mid-twenties. Anybody watch 'Everybody Loves Raymond,?
HeHe, You may have crossed the line between being an involved parent and an overly protective mother hen. It's OK, I have some of those kind of parents.
This whole idea of controlling the internet from an international organization just goes to show how stupid politicians really are. In the course of their debating which probably cost millions of dollars from around the world, why wasn't one person smart enough to do some research or bring in a subject matter expert in order to determine if it is even feasible to control internet content on a global scale?
Maybe they are more active in the enterprise market because they feel that Linux is not ready for home use.
the vast majority of ALL software is rubbish. GPL or not. Much GPL software is mistakenly assumed to be bad simply because it is obtainable before it is even close to being finished. I do know one thing. I have never seen ANY software grow and mature at a rate like KDE has. They have really improved their package when you really stop to consider what all is included in it.
That's what I thought at first because I was thinking in the mindset of it being okay since the texts were not actually being sold and in fact that this was introduced to help sales. However, the pro blem is that there must be a contract in which amazon is paying the publisher for this privelige (of searching the full texts). If this is the case, the authors deserve some of that money since the publisher is benefiting from their work and not compensating them.
I am sure the author would apologize for informing people that there is more to OSes than what is on a PC. It just goes to show how cautious you have to be when logging on to AOL and surfing the net. Careful, you might soon end up learning that the internet and the world wide web are not one in the same.
Uh, it looks like you said this in reply to the original post and I feel to see the propoganda either for or against any of the OS developers. Neither the slashdot or the articles promote ITRON or bash Windows.
I for one, had not knowledge of what is running on these devices, and now I am a smarter person because of this. This slashdot and article is clearly intended for that very purpose. It assumes that most people are not aware of the different embedded OSes on their electronic devices, it then informs them of the most popular of these OSes. Of course, maybe you think it would all be better off if we remained ignorant of these facts, in which case, I suggest you find a less technology oriented news/information website. Maybe news.yahoo.com or whatever news feature AOL offers.
What is obvious is that the only one here with an agenda is you, who is jumping at the oppurtunity to take cheap shots at the majority of the slashdot crowd, which in general is not a fan of Windows.
In addition to indy bands we should also be allowed to listen to anything with with a copyright over 28 years (and 14 years if the artist is deceased). That was the original length for copyright which was changed despite the fact that it clearly was not in the public good and was unconstitutional. Anybody interested in listening to those oldies that qualify should feel free to download them because they should be part of the public domain, and if it went to court and was fought, it would be a pretty much open and shut case. The constitution is pretty straight forward when it comes to making a decision on copyright extension.
s /000565.ph p
A good read on the subject:
http://www.onlisareinsradar.com/archive