please tell me which freedom you lack because of right-to-reply?
it exists for decades now and just got extended to cover electronic publishing. it's reasonable, it's not really burdensome (a link to the reply - 80bytes or so - will surely kill you, right?).
you can even ignore it - you're in about the same situation as in the USA then: get sued, publish the reply, probably pay a fine
the only thing you can't do it talk shit about people with much less power than you (money, influence,..), so it actually evens the field a bit.
of course, if you just want to ensure "freedom" and "rights" for those with the money to pay for them, right-to-reply will be nothing for you.
the german mentality prefers to build a strong set of laws and use the courts as an exception instead of them being the rule. there also doesn't exist the strong notion of "case law" as it is in the USA. past court decrees _may_ be used as guidelines, esp if one of the sides brings up that case, but usually our laws are enough for a proper decision.
should ISPs be allowed (or forced) to filter out content they're unhappy with on their routers and not pass it on because a request was made?
first you (not you directly, but several people here) blame china because they exercise that control, then you blame freenet because it takes away that control.
it's not so much about the "on paper" thing (it could be in any legally binding way), but it has to be _before_ you buy the product (and the waiver "you can send it back for a full refund" might or might now work)
as for EULA vs. MIT/BSD/GPL/.. licenses: the EULA takes away rights you'd normally have (reverse engineering), so you have to be informed about it before you buy (and of course agree to it) the Free Licenses have no effect on "normal" use, only if you want to go _beyond_ existing law (like copying/selling) where they extend it for you.
EULA: If you use the application, you have to hand over your first born - or whatever they want from you these days. Anything beyond the law is explicitely forbidden.
FLOSS Licenses: If you don't redistribute the program, you couldn't care less about the license, if you do, you have to know about the license terms anyway
apart that laws again slander and libel are much more hassle (you need money, it might take months, the outcome is unclear) than a directive that encourages the "speaker" to publish that damn URL you provide and be done with it.
the problem with libel and slander is that you have to enforce it in court..
* do you have the money to fight a media bully? * how does it help your reputation, if you win?
media bullies usually don't talk about their lost trials
try the "hey, CNN! According to art. foo in the BAR act, I want you to carry my response to your try to damage my reputation at the same place where this article was" if that doesn't work, you have another point to make in court..
how about tkabber (TK GUI, who thought it; _very_ powerful), gabber (gnome, in kinda sleeping state currently), imcom (ncurses, console) and I think there are several more
and what's wrong with qt really? I mean, it's quite a good GUI package and free software for a long time now
well, in terms of features, Moonlight isn't as complete yet
why does it exist?
- because some stupid guy did not take the sources of blender in 1996 or so when he started moonlight
- because some other stupid guys liked moonlight and used it
- because it's easier to cope with without learning yet-another-GUI-paradigm
- because it's fun hacking it (blender doesn't even build yet afaik)
- because blender sources weren't free in january, when I started
- and finally, because I guess that the blender sources are much bigger and less understandable than source that was once meant to be open instead of some corporate beast that wasn't supposed to see the light
maybe some stuff like choice could be brought in to the discussion as well...
Slashdot Mirror
Open as in OpenBIOS (www.openbios.org) - it's GPL
we have that "genre sorted p2p" - it's called http.
and for downloads, bittorrent became pretty popular recently (and it's long term usable if there's a stable seed node, unlike those warez torrents)
together with KDE e.V. (non-profit org) who made a contract with trolltech to ensure that Qt stays GPL'd.
please tell me which freedom you lack because of right-to-reply?
..), so it actually evens the field a bit.
it exists for decades now and just got extended to cover electronic publishing. it's reasonable, it's not really burdensome (a link to the reply - 80bytes or so - will surely kill you, right?).
you can even ignore it - you're in about the same situation as in the USA then: get sued, publish the reply, probably pay a fine
the only thing you can't do it talk shit about people with much less power than you (money, influence,
of course, if you just want to ensure "freedom" and "rights" for those with the money to pay for them, right-to-reply will be nothing for you.
the german mentality prefers to build a strong set of laws and use the courts as an exception instead of them being the rule.
there also doesn't exist the strong notion of "case law" as it is in the USA. past court decrees _may_ be used as guidelines, esp if one of the sides brings up that case, but usually our laws are enough for a proper decision.
freenet is a routing network..
should ISPs be allowed (or forced) to filter out content they're unhappy with on their routers and not pass it on because a request was made?
first you (not you directly, but several people here) blame china because they exercise that control, then you blame freenet because it takes away that control.
it's not so much about the "on paper" thing (it could be in any legally binding way), but it has to be _before_ you buy the product (and the waiver "you can send it back for a full refund" might or might now work)
as for EULA vs. MIT/BSD/GPL/.. licenses:
the EULA takes away rights you'd normally have (reverse engineering), so you have to be informed about it before you buy (and of course agree to it)
the Free Licenses have no effect on "normal" use, only if you want to go _beyond_ existing law (like copying/selling) where they extend it for you.
EULA:
If you use the application, you have to hand over your first born - or whatever they want from you these days. Anything beyond the law is explicitely forbidden.
FLOSS Licenses:
If you don't redistribute the program, you couldn't care less about the license, if you do, you have to know about the license terms anyway
apart that laws again slander and libel are much more hassle (you need money, it might take months, the outcome is unclear) than a directive that encourages the "speaker" to publish that damn URL you provide and be done with it.
aren't your courts busy enough already?
the problem with libel and slander is that you have to enforce it in court..
* do you have the money to fight a media bully?
* how does it help your reputation, if you win?
media bullies usually don't talk about their lost trials
try the "hey, CNN! According to art. foo in the BAR act, I want you to carry my response to your try to damage my reputation at the same place where this article was"
if that doesn't work, you have another point to make in court..
.. and you still have to mess around with the mpeg patent pools - no thanks!
how about tkabber (TK GUI, who thought it; _very_ powerful), gabber (gnome, in kinda sleeping state currently), imcom (ncurses, console) and I think there are several more
and what's wrong with qt really? I mean, it's quite a good GUI package and free software for a long time now
www.jabberstudio.org, "browse projects", "clients"
File - Properties - Statistics - Update, "Word count"
what was it that stops writers to adopt OpenOffice?
http://cdexos.sf.net delivers an Ogg/Vorbis encoder plugin in the binary package.. you just have to select it in the preferences
that's exactly what you get when _not_ using the -sea installer (self extracting archive).
just strip off -sea from the installer filename where present or look around at their ftp-server
download sources from http://ml3d.sourceforge.net/install/moonlight-0.5. 5.tar.bz2
we're still playing catch up with the last binary release, but well...
well, in terms of features, Moonlight isn't as complete yet
why does it exist?
- because some stupid guy did not take the sources of blender in 1996 or so when he started moonlight
- because some other stupid guys liked moonlight and used it
- because it's easier to cope with without learning yet-another-GUI-paradigm
- because it's fun hacking it (blender doesn't even build yet afaik)
- because blender sources weren't free in january, when I started
- and finally, because I guess that the blender sources are much bigger and less understandable than source that was once meant to be open instead of some corporate beast that wasn't supposed to see the light
maybe some stuff like choice could be brought in to the discussion as well...