And you would prefer a country where you cannot criticise your own governement???
Isen't that the exact reason why U.S. "claims" they removed saddam from power? Because it was not a democracy? And you sit here attacking the most important part of a democratic system???
We've seen how copy protection has done so well in the last 20 years, lol!
The problem of piracy will never go away, only viable solution is to try and profit from it, throw a few advertisers on your downloads page for the editor, or add some advertisers into the product, same way radio and tv networks do it, and you'll get a return.
A bad economy equates in lower sales in all markets, just mr. vaccum cleaner manufacturer cannot blame piracy for the moeny he didnt make last year, while mr software publisher can. Thats why movies + music + games are selling alot less, people are broke.
Piracy has been existent for years and years, and yet companies still made billions in revenue. Who dosen't recall the first time they played a cracked version of doom on their 486?
Yea, and Windows, means Windows, like the ones in my house. Would they be able to sue physical window manufacturers because it could bring confusion to someone who wants to buy the infamous M$ product?
If you don't collect any money and people just pickup the cocaine, you wouldnt have dealing charges (distribution) only possession charges (as drugs are in fact illegal to possess, unlike copyrighted works for personal use), so makes perfect sense what the judge says.
You've taken the thoughts right out of my head, We can also apologize for having objective judges that dont take monetary bribes from the corporation to bend judgements. Technically it isen't our fault, but same with the beer, we feel your pain:)
I would like to say how proud I am to be Canadian.
When's the p2p wing scheduled to open in the Guatanemo Bay Torture Prison?
Of course, as this point there is some backlash against EV1, from the supporters or OSS.
But the thing with a company like EV1Servers, is they offer a great product, I know first hand from my experience and some of my clients experiences, so even though people dont support him for moral reasons now, when everything blows over and people start forgetting what happened, people will go to ev1 for the simple fact its a great service.
I am not worried about the future of EV1.
So by that analogy, law-abidding citizens need to suffer because of the fear that the service might be used illegally. Maybe you should rethink your stance.
This is a direct relation between freedom and security, because there is fear that terrorist actions can be committed in a free society, freedoms are stripped away. Even though the scale is not at the same level, it's still a relation.
I should be able to have all the freedoms I deserve as well as have all the functionality from my software. Just because something makes it easier for criminals dosen't mean I shouldn't be able to have it for my legitimate purposes.
Maybe in the current economy, that's because all the self-taught people are all working in the industry, through connections, they are dragged from teir basements kicking and screaming.
Great way to encourage piracy, tell the kids under 17 they can't buy their favorite games, the largest portion of the pirating world are 12-19 years old.
I'm not condonning this, but this is a hard fact, you won't fix the problem by making laws, this is the parents job anyway.
Like I said earlier, prevent a 16 years kid who is in love with Grand Theft Auto (If you haven't been a witness to this you don't get out much!) from buying the next version of the game, and the amount of burnt copies will spread worse than SARS in Asia.
Even in the time we live in now, you will still hide behind other people's problems instead of facing your own hard truth. It's the american way isen't it? If someone does it worse, it makes you feel a whole lot better about yourself dosen't it?
That's why americans don't want to help themselves, that mentality has seaped in so deep it won't come out.
Someday you will realize that there will always be someone worse off than you, no matter what, wasting your time pointing out other people's problems won't get you anywhere. And continuing down that path will eventually lead you to being worse off than everyone else. Seems like my theory is in the process of being proven with the path of the US. Always saying "It's not that bad, look at them they are far worse" and bam, another liberty gone.
Great Minds talk about Ideas.
Average Minds talk about Things.
Small Minds talk about Other People.
Seems that everyday the scale keeps weighing down towards the latter.
In a personal case, this might hold up, but if you sell tables for a living and people put gold bars in all your tables, and you don't inspect them, then yes, you suffer the loss. You're putting your quality control stamp on the table saying it's legit and ready to go, you can't take that back afterwards, it's your fault for not inspecting what you sell.
If the table comes out clean from inspection after the production line, and then (movers) stick something in it onthe shipment process, then it's different, but if right off the production line, then yes it's yuor fault. Joe blow should lose his gold bar, because it was in the table all along, and he didn't take a look at it before giving it away. The case you say would be someone putting something in it during the moving process and that's anot story, cuz the owner has no way of knowing, there was a third party. This is directly SCO approving code and giving it out under a license, I think it's 100% their fault. If they wanted to milk this cow they had to do it long time ago.
Re:GPL the best bet
on
OSI vs SCO
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
It's as if I give you an old table I found in my basement, and you find a gold bar in one of the legs. Can I sue you to get it back because I didn't know that it was there? No, because it's yours and myfault for not inspecting the table beforehand to ensure I was only giving away the table. You came over, and I gave you the table, end of discussion.
Exact same concept here, SCO is responsible, intent is irrelevant here, because it's not even criminal, it's civil. Someone else "might" have put some code belonging to SCO in the linux kernel, Caldera knowingly kept licensing linux for years, without even knowing what's in the kernel, like I said earlier, waving the right to claim that it's not their fault, wether they meant to do it or not, it's negligence, and they shouldn't be rewarded.
They want money for damages ages after the actually offense happened (I'm assuming it did in this case) and they don't want to take any blame for purposly continuing to contribute to it.
What I am saying here is that they are clearly at foul, and this is most likely pointing to a case of money hungry conglomerates. I mean, you can defend them all you want, but if you want to look at it in a logical sense, they were stupid, and gave away their own shit, copyright dosen't excuse stupidity, nor should the courts.
Re:GPL the best bet
on
OSI vs SCO
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
No, you are completly missing the point, don't know how it's very simple.
SCO is a distributor, it's not the user's fault, nor will he ever be held liable to using a product that was legitimatly licensed software given to him.
SCO IS LICENSING THEIR GODAMN OS!, you're damn right that everyone that licenses through the GPL SHOULD KNOW EXACTLY WHAT's IN IT! this has nothing to do with joe blow linux user, this has to do with distributors who create and release this stuff, sometimes for a profit, sometimes for not, it's their responisbility. Total bullshit that a company can claim they didn't know what the fuck they were licensing.
Every godamn linux distributor should be inspecting their releases, if they waive that right, they also waive the right to sue for infrigement, if something in that release happened to be one of their trade secrets. This is not the case if someone else does it, if I take SCO's code and implement it, I am at fault, and redhat can't be held liable for my contribution, only I can be held liable. But if SCO dosen't check their own stuff, they just download source and give it out as GPL, that's their problem, cuz they actually own the IP, so they are giving their consent by waiving the right to look at it, even if it was taken from under their nose.
I'm not condoning this action, but I am saying if your own IP, you need to always look carefully at your releases to make sure you don't go releasing it to the public, cuz after that it's too late, and you shouldn't be able to claim damages.
That's the risk you take by owning IP and contributing to open source, it could be SCO employees that put the code in, no one really knows, but since SCO gave it out themselves, it's their fault, regardless of who actually put it in the OS.
This is not a hit on the open source model, because it's clearly a grab at cash, linux will survive in the splendor it is, exactly because of the copyleft, and the fact that if you assign it GPL, you are giving it away, wether the fuck you know what in it or not!
Re:GPL the best bet
on
OSI vs SCO
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
IMHO, I think SCO is at fault, "not knowing" is no excuse in court, they distributed Caldera, if they wanted to distrubute code without knowing whats in it, hence giving it a blind license, they can't claim that they didn't know. It was their responsibility to look at the code in Caldera to make sure that everything in there belonged there, before they license it with GPL and give it away. If they would of been doing that, the copied code would have been spotted right away and it would of been solved then, but they have been distributing this OS for quite some time, and now claim that they didn't do quality control, it's not anyone elses fault.
They don't belong in the OS industry if they can't even manage their own releases, and/or know what it even does.
Good post, I completly agree. You either do it or you don't there is no middle ground between a free market and a socialist market, but if u do accept a middle ground, you're not free, nor are you socialist, you are BOTH!
So basically, no argument from any side of the issue can actually make a difference, because both systems are colliding.
The problem is, the way the system has gotten now, with the bad economy, and the governement depending on big business to keep them out of the red and at the same time trying to please the public.
Maybe someone should propose a bill that would prevent politics from mixing with business, and have harsh penalties for coersion. Not allowing political parties to accept donations, fight tooth and nail for REAL political opinions, instead of who has the most banner ads on your street. It would be nice to talk to someone someday and hear his opinion on why he votes and that it didn't involve that fact that he/she was enticed by their colorful poster.
Just because it's worse somewhere else dosen't mean I'm gonna feel lucky about the way it is, that's exactly what they want you to think while they slip away your rights from under your nose, the rights that my ancestors have fought and died for.
Oh look, in X country, this and that happens! Look at how lucky we are!
That is a crock of shit! It has nothing to do with luck, alot of people have fought for it.
Agreed, people confuse this with spam too much, going to a website means you are soliciting everything the website has to offer, you can't complain about that.
I'll explain my POV on this thought, clearly a good question, why would he say it's contributory infringment. Reason here is the major case was due to that fact, and that's what HEMMER asked, WHY did they go after you, not what did you settle for doing, RIAA went after the search engine.
IF you read my reply lower on this post you'll see what I mean, the headlines ate up the 97 billion, and almost no one heard about the tiny settlement, already forgotten, but the 97 billion is engraved in everybody's mind.
I'm not a conspiracy theorist, but I can clearly see what is going on, don't confuse the fact that they settled to admitting to the contribury infrigement charge, because if the RIAA really had a case on that part, they would of brought it to court for precendent, but it was a clear cut loss, but the students all had illegal mp3s and they would of paid up a bit anyway, so the settlement was better for them. RIAA had a case for the collection, but not for the engine, which is why it got settled fast. lose-lose for the student, and also the reason why the server will be back up by the time hes back at school.
I can sue you for having a small penis, dosen't mean I will win does it?
See, the reason for the low settlement was because the RIAA knew they had no chance on the contributory infringement, and could only claim small damages for the mp3 collection, that's why they settled out of court, the headlines did their job by annoucing 97 billion. That's what the RIAA wanted, even though they had no chance, but basically, if it went to court, the students would of lost damages for their collection anyway, which would of cost them about the same amount as the settlement, maybe more, so it was a lose lose situation, but no way in hell would it have been 97 billion.
It's a big threat by bullies, who have the power to control the media, as they obviously convinced reporters that they ACTUALLY had a case for 97 billion, which is a classic case of non-reporting as I like to call it, where a story is only written with the interesting parts and the other "facts" are left out, even tho they are completly true, so the media dosen't lie, they just dot tell everything.
No you missed the point, along with the rest of the crowd here posting same as you.
Notice how he said he's bringing the server back online when he gets back? He didn't settle due to the search engine, he settled due to his collection of mp3s, which he was clearly infringing on and there was no defense for that.
The settlement had nothing to do with the fact that they created a search engine, because they clearly cannot go after such services.
Slashdot Mirror
And you would prefer a country where you cannot criticise your own governement???
Isen't that the exact reason why U.S. "claims" they removed saddam from power? Because it was not a democracy? And you sit here attacking the most important part of a democratic system???
Are you a confused American?
We've seen how copy protection has done so well in the last 20 years, lol!
The problem of piracy will never go away, only viable solution is to try and profit from it, throw a few advertisers on your downloads page for the editor, or add some advertisers into the product, same way radio and tv networks do it, and you'll get a return.
A bad economy equates in lower sales in all markets, just mr. vaccum cleaner manufacturer cannot blame piracy for the moeny he didnt make last year, while mr software publisher can. Thats why movies + music + games are selling alot less, people are broke.
Piracy has been existent for years and years, and yet companies still made billions in revenue. Who dosen't recall the first time they played a cracked version of doom on their 486?
Yea, and Windows, means Windows, like the ones in my house.
Would they be able to sue physical window manufacturers because it could bring confusion to someone who wants to buy the infamous M$ product?
lol
If you don't collect any money and people just pickup the cocaine, you wouldnt have dealing charges (distribution) only possession charges (as drugs are in fact illegal to possess, unlike copyrighted works for personal use), so makes perfect sense what the judge says.
You've taken the thoughts right out of my head, We can also apologize for having objective judges that dont take monetary bribes from the corporation to bend judgements. Technically it isen't our fault, but same with the beer, we feel your pain :)
I would like to say how proud I am to be Canadian.
When's the p2p wing scheduled to open in the Guatanemo Bay Torture Prison?
Of course, as this point there is some backlash against EV1, from the supporters or OSS. But the thing with a company like EV1Servers, is they offer a great product, I know first hand from my experience and some of my clients experiences, so even though people dont support him for moral reasons now, when everything blows over and people start forgetting what happened, people will go to ev1 for the simple fact its a great service. I am not worried about the future of EV1.
After doing Enron calculus for so long, it sticks in your head forever!!!
So by that analogy, law-abidding citizens need to suffer because of the fear that the service might be used illegally. Maybe you should rethink your stance.
This is a direct relation between freedom and security, because there is fear that terrorist actions can be committed in a free society, freedoms are stripped away. Even though the scale is not at the same level, it's still a relation.
I should be able to have all the freedoms I deserve as well as have all the functionality from my software. Just because something makes it easier for criminals dosen't mean I shouldn't be able to have it for my legitimate purposes.
Judging by the number of trolls on slashdot claiming to have graduated from american universities, it's not the education either.
Most likely the women!
Maybe in the current economy, that's because all the self-taught people are all working in the industry, through connections, they are dragged from teir basements kicking and screaming.
The best in the world came in that way.
Great way to encourage piracy, tell the kids under 17 they can't buy their favorite games, the largest portion of the pirating world are 12-19 years old.
I'm not condonning this, but this is a hard fact, you won't fix the problem by making laws, this is the parents job anyway.
Like I said earlier, prevent a 16 years kid who is in love with Grand Theft Auto (If you haven't been a witness to this you don't get out much!) from buying the next version of the game, and the amount of burnt copies will spread worse than SARS in Asia.
Even in the time we live in now, you will still hide behind other people's problems instead of facing your own hard truth. It's the american way isen't it? If someone does it worse, it makes you feel a whole lot better about yourself dosen't it?
That's why americans don't want to help themselves, that mentality has seaped in so deep it won't come out.
Someday you will realize that there will always be someone worse off than you, no matter what, wasting your time pointing out other people's problems won't get you anywhere. And continuing down that path will eventually lead you to being worse off than everyone else. Seems like my theory is in the process of being proven with the path of the US. Always saying "It's not that bad, look at them they are far worse" and bam, another liberty gone.
Great Minds talk about Ideas.
Average Minds talk about Things.
Small Minds talk about Other People.
Seems that everyday the scale keeps weighing down towards the latter.
In a personal case, this might hold up, but if you sell tables for a living and people put gold bars in all your tables, and you don't inspect them, then yes, you suffer the loss. You're putting your quality control stamp on the table saying it's legit and ready to go, you can't take that back afterwards, it's your fault for not inspecting what you sell.
If the table comes out clean from inspection after the production line, and then (movers) stick something in it onthe shipment process, then it's different, but if right off the production line, then yes it's yuor fault. Joe blow should lose his gold bar, because it was in the table all along, and he didn't take a look at it before giving it away. The case you say would be someone putting something in it during the moving process and that's anot story, cuz the owner has no way of knowing, there was a third party. This is directly SCO approving code and giving it out under a license, I think it's 100% their fault. If they wanted to milk this cow they had to do it long time ago.
It's as if I give you an old table I found in my basement, and you find a gold bar in one of the legs. Can I sue you to get it back because I didn't know that it was there? No, because it's yours and myfault for not inspecting the table beforehand to ensure I was only giving away the table. You came over, and I gave you the table, end of discussion.
Exact same concept here, SCO is responsible, intent is irrelevant here, because it's not even criminal, it's civil. Someone else "might" have put some code belonging to SCO in the linux kernel, Caldera knowingly kept licensing linux for years, without even knowing what's in the kernel, like I said earlier, waving the right to claim that it's not their fault, wether they meant to do it or not, it's negligence, and they shouldn't be rewarded.
They want money for damages ages after the actually offense happened (I'm assuming it did in this case) and they don't want to take any blame for purposly continuing to contribute to it.
What I am saying here is that they are clearly at foul, and this is most likely pointing to a case of money hungry conglomerates. I mean, you can defend them all you want, but if you want to look at it in a logical sense, they were stupid, and gave away their own shit, copyright dosen't excuse stupidity, nor should the courts.
No, you are completly missing the point, don't know how it's very simple.
SCO is a distributor, it's not the user's fault, nor will he ever be held liable to using a product that was legitimatly licensed software given to him.
SCO IS LICENSING THEIR GODAMN OS!, you're damn right that everyone that licenses through the GPL SHOULD KNOW EXACTLY WHAT's IN IT! this has nothing to do with joe blow linux user, this has to do with distributors who create and release this stuff, sometimes for a profit, sometimes for not, it's their responisbility. Total bullshit that a company can claim they didn't know what the fuck they were licensing.
Every godamn linux distributor should be inspecting their releases, if they waive that right, they also waive the right to sue for infrigement, if something in that release happened to be one of their trade secrets. This is not the case if someone else does it, if I take SCO's code and implement it, I am at fault, and redhat can't be held liable for my contribution, only I can be held liable. But if SCO dosen't check their own stuff, they just download source and give it out as GPL, that's their problem, cuz they actually own the IP, so they are giving their consent by waiving the right to look at it, even if it was taken from under their nose.
I'm not condoning this action, but I am saying if your own IP, you need to always look carefully at your releases to make sure you don't go releasing it to the public, cuz after that it's too late, and you shouldn't be able to claim damages.
That's the risk you take by owning IP and contributing to open source, it could be SCO employees that put the code in, no one really knows, but since SCO gave it out themselves, it's their fault, regardless of who actually put it in the OS.
This is not a hit on the open source model, because it's clearly a grab at cash, linux will survive in the splendor it is, exactly because of the copyleft, and the fact that if you assign it GPL, you are giving it away, wether the fuck you know what in it or not!
IMHO, I think SCO is at fault, "not knowing" is no excuse in court, they distributed Caldera, if they wanted to distrubute code without knowing whats in it, hence giving it a blind license, they can't claim that they didn't know. It was their responsibility to look at the code in Caldera to make sure that everything in there belonged there, before they license it with GPL and give it away. If they would of been doing that, the copied code would have been spotted right away and it would of been solved then, but they have been distributing this OS for quite some time, and now claim that they didn't do quality control, it's not anyone elses fault.
They don't belong in the OS industry if they can't even manage their own releases, and/or know what it even does.
Good post, I completly agree. You either do it or you don't there is no middle ground between a free market and a socialist market, but if u do accept a middle ground, you're not free, nor are you socialist, you are BOTH!
So basically, no argument from any side of the issue can actually make a difference, because both systems are colliding.
The problem is, the way the system has gotten now, with the bad economy, and the governement depending on big business to keep them out of the red and at the same time trying to please the public.
Maybe someone should propose a bill that would prevent politics from mixing with business, and have harsh penalties for coersion. Not allowing political parties to accept donations, fight tooth and nail for REAL political opinions, instead of who has the most banner ads on your street. It would be nice to talk to someone someday and hear his opinion on why he votes and that it didn't involve that fact that he/she was enticed by their colorful poster.
Just because it's worse somewhere else dosen't mean I'm gonna feel lucky about the way it is, that's exactly what they want you to think while they slip away your rights from under your nose, the rights that my ancestors have fought and died for.
Oh look, in X country, this and that happens! Look at how lucky we are!
That is a crock of shit! It has nothing to do with luck, alot of people have fought for it.
That was one kickass movie
Anyone notice that the guy who wrote this article is the evil John Markoff who profited from Kevin Mitnick's story?
bahahahah, this is really hilarious
Agreed, people confuse this with spam too much, going to a website means you are soliciting everything the website has to offer, you can't complain about that.
I'll explain my POV on this thought, clearly a good question, why would he say it's contributory infringment. Reason here is the major case was due to that fact, and that's what HEMMER asked, WHY did they go after you, not what did you settle for doing, RIAA went after the search engine.
IF you read my reply lower on this post you'll see what I mean, the headlines ate up the 97 billion, and almost no one heard about the tiny settlement, already forgotten, but the 97 billion is engraved in everybody's mind.
I'm not a conspiracy theorist, but I can clearly see what is going on, don't confuse the fact that they settled to admitting to the contribury infrigement charge, because if the RIAA really had a case on that part, they would of brought it to court for precendent, but it was a clear cut loss, but the students all had illegal mp3s and they would of paid up a bit anyway, so the settlement was better for them. RIAA had a case for the collection, but not for the engine, which is why it got settled fast. lose-lose for the student, and also the reason why the server will be back up by the time hes back at school.
I can sue you for having a small penis, dosen't mean I will win does it?
See, the reason for the low settlement was because the RIAA knew they had no chance on the contributory infringement, and could only claim small damages for the mp3 collection, that's why they settled out of court, the headlines did their job by annoucing 97 billion. That's what the RIAA wanted, even though they had no chance, but basically, if it went to court, the students would of lost damages for their collection anyway, which would of cost them about the same amount as the settlement, maybe more, so it was a lose lose situation, but no way in hell would it have been 97 billion.
It's a big threat by bullies, who have the power to control the media, as they obviously convinced reporters that they ACTUALLY had a case for 97 billion, which is a classic case of non-reporting as I like to call it, where a story is only written with the interesting parts and the other "facts" are left out, even tho they are completly true, so the media dosen't lie, they just dot tell everything.
No you missed the point, along with the rest of the crowd here posting same as you.
Notice how he said he's bringing the server back online when he gets back? He didn't settle due to the search engine, he settled due to his collection of mp3s, which he was clearly infringing on and there was no defense for that.
The settlement had nothing to do with the fact that they created a search engine, because they clearly cannot go after such services.