Re:libgcc, libstdc++, and Bison
on
GPLv2 Vs. GPLv3
·
· Score: 1
Currently, libgcc, libstdc++, and Bison are under the GNU GPL v2. Programs compiled with GCC use libgcc (and libstdc++ if written in C++), and parsers created with Bison use the Bison boilerplate parser. These libraries are GPL with an exception that permits combining the library with the executable without bringing the resulting executable under the GPL in the majority of cases. For example, this is the text of libgcc's exception:
Which makes me wonder why libstdc++ and the others you mentioned aren't licensed under the LGPL instead. Wasn't that the whole point of having the LGPL as well?
Under US law at any rate, a company would be laughed out of court if they attempted to sue over two notes. One of the provisions mentioned under fair use is the amount of material used from the source work.
Besides which, there's only so many combinations of two notes... 144 if you're dealing with two notes in the same octave, 576 if you're dealing with two octaves.
I haven't done a study, but I'm fairly sure that the probability of two notes in a row, played on the same instrument, being within two octaves of each other is somewhere above 99%, with the percentage dropping slightly the more notes you take into account.
Copyrights are weaker than patents in that they cover specifics rather than the abstract. However, copyright also has stronger rules about what is and isn't allowed with copyrighted works.
For instance, in the US it's illegal to create a derivative work of a copyrighted piece without permission of the copyright owner*. Not surprisingly, tabs and sheet music (objects created with the express purpose of allowing someone to recreate the original work), are covered by that rule. It may surprise you, but there are companies out there that produce tabs and sheet music for songs that have actually licensed the rights to do so. Not surprisingly, these companies are also not happy about people creating their own tabs/sheet music and (more importantly) distributing them over the Internet.
* Other provisions of Title 17 need to be taken into account, particularly Section 107 Fair Use. For example, a movie review only contains minute details about a movie's plot, so that is exempted from copyright law, as opposed to a (tran)script of the movie.
If you integrate GPLed code into an application, your application is not automatically GPLed.
Er... yes it is. That is rather the point of the GPL. Heck, you can't even link against a GPL library without your project becoming GPL because of it, hence the existance of the LGPL.
Just a nitpick: The original Super Mario Bros. never appeared on the GBA. It appeared on the GBC as Super Mario Bros. DX along with its sequel, the japanese version of Super Mario Bros. 2.
Yup, the announcement in the blog says nothing about Linux Tools, only the comments mention them. It's the upgrade page that actually mentions the Linux Tools.
More importantly, what do these tools do? If I were to seriously consider running OSX with Linux under it in Parallels, I'd like to know what exactly this gives me.
Of course, Linux isn't the only other x86 operating system out there. The BSD family is, for instance. I know people who swear by the OpenBSD firewall tool, for instance. However, I can't gauge the importance of not having these tools unless I actually know what they're for.
EQ2 has the same sysetm, you get titles for slaying a certain number of gnolls/orcs/undead/etc. And this predates WoW, though not CoH.
I'm assuming you meant to say EQ2 predates LotRO, as 1. WoW was released during the same month as EQ2 and 2. WoW doesn't really have a title system like this... well, it does, but only for PvP and Arena stuff.
In answer to the final problem, this is exactly why most MMOs have "normal" and PvP servers. One is for the carebears, one is for the hardcore PvP crowd.
I'll also note that, in the past, team human vs. team computer is usually how my friends and I play RTS games, formerly in Starcraft, but more recently in Age of Empires III.
But the true solution to your now limited requirement is this: fc00::/7 Unique local IPv6 unicast addresses are routable only within a set of cooperating sites. They were defined in RFC 4193 as a replacement for site-local addresses. The addresses include a 40-bit pseudorandom number that minimizes the risk of conflicts if sites merge or packets somehow leak out.
So, in other words I should use a kludge in order to implement something that IPv6 was supposed to solve?
including the right to make a backup for archival purposes
I don't see that particular right spelled out anywhere except for computer programs. I don't know what definition Title 17 uses for computer programs, but I'm willing to bet it doesn't cover non-executable files, such as audio and video files.
Verizon is advertising a package that combats this as well... I didn't find their commercial on youtube, but it's the one with the mom being able to quit her second job because they can now afford texting, pix, and flix... whatever the latter two are.
Guaranteed delivery! You send someone a message, whether their phone is on or off, they WILL get that message. You place a phone call, it's a one time deal. Someone answers, or they don't.
I imagine the current reporting system does this: I file a report that someone is spamming me. In doing so, I implicitly give permission to the GMs to take a look at all tells sent to me by that person. They take a look at the communication between us and decide whether or not the person was really spamming.
All this does is automate the reporting step and automatically ignore them as well.
That's part of patent law I've never understood. I've been told by people (who have patents) that it is in their best interest to *NOT* do a patent search before applying for a patent, since that search could be used against them later, to prove willful infringement, which carries a stiffer penalty (I guess) than mere incidental infringement.
I don't know about for patents, but failure to practice due diligence will get you into trouble in other legal circumstances.
Slashdot Mirror
Which makes me wonder why libstdc++ and the others you mentioned aren't licensed under the LGPL instead. Wasn't that the whole point of having the LGPL as well?
Guitar tabs are intended to allow others to recreate the melody and chords, and possibly to a lesser extent, the lyrics and arrangements.
That would qualify as the majority of the song.
You see, US copyright law does care how much of the material is similar or the same, as outlined in Title 17 Section 107 Fair Use.
That's also why it'd be impossible to sue and win over the chords you mentioned above.
Under US law at any rate, a company would be laughed out of court if they attempted to sue over two notes. One of the provisions mentioned under fair use is the amount of material used from the source work.
Besides which, there's only so many combinations of two notes... 144 if you're dealing with two notes in the same octave, 576 if you're dealing with two octaves.
I haven't done a study, but I'm fairly sure that the probability of two notes in a row, played on the same instrument, being within two octaves of each other is somewhere above 99%, with the percentage dropping slightly the more notes you take into account.
I'm going to start with the usual IANAL.
Copyrights are weaker than patents in that they cover specifics rather than the abstract. However, copyright also has stronger rules about what is and isn't allowed with copyrighted works.
For instance, in the US it's illegal to create a derivative work of a copyrighted piece without permission of the copyright owner*. Not surprisingly, tabs and sheet music (objects created with the express purpose of allowing someone to recreate the original work), are covered by that rule. It may surprise you, but there are companies out there that produce tabs and sheet music for songs that have actually licensed the rights to do so. Not surprisingly, these companies are also not happy about people creating their own tabs/sheet music and (more importantly) distributing them over the Internet.
* Other provisions of Title 17 need to be taken into account, particularly Section 107 Fair Use. For example, a movie review only contains minute details about a movie's plot, so that is exempted from copyright law, as opposed to a (tran)script of the movie.
I thought it was to discuss what Linus said.
Personally, I think he's on crack, going on and on about the "Great Pumpkin."
Er... yes it is. That is rather the point of the GPL. Heck, you can't even link against a GPL library without your project becoming GPL because of it, hence the existance of the LGPL.
I'm a ditz. I completely forgot the Classic NES series. So... it appeared on the GBC and GBA both.
/.'s comment timer to expire so this can be posted.*
*waits for
Just a nitpick: The original Super Mario Bros. never appeared on the GBA. It appeared on the GBC as Super Mario Bros. DX along with its sequel, the japanese version of Super Mario Bros. 2.
Fat chance of seeing Goldeneye 007 or Blast Corps, as they're owned by Rare, now a division of Microsoft Game Studios.
You won't see Perfect Dark, Banjo-Kazooie, Banjo-Tooie, and Conker's Bad Fur Day for the same reason.
Oh, and with Zelda 2 being released next week, all the non-disc console Zeldas except Majora's Mask will be out.
In other words, you already knew why people compare other MMOs to WoW and just made your original post to be a fucktard.
Did I mention I hate hypocrites?
Yup, the announcement in the blog says nothing about Linux Tools, only the comments mention them. It's the upgrade page that actually mentions the Linux Tools.
More importantly, what do these tools do? If I were to seriously consider running OSX with Linux under it in Parallels, I'd like to know what exactly this gives me.
Of course, Linux isn't the only other x86 operating system out there. The BSD family is, for instance. I know people who swear by the OpenBSD firewall tool, for instance. However, I can't gauge the importance of not having these tools unless I actually know what they're for.
I'm assuming you meant to say EQ2 predates LotRO, as 1. WoW was released during the same month as EQ2 and 2. WoW doesn't really have a title system like this... well, it does, but only for PvP and Arena stuff.
In answer to the final problem, this is exactly why most MMOs have "normal" and PvP servers. One is for the carebears, one is for the hardcore PvP crowd.
I'll also note that, in the past, team human vs. team computer is usually how my friends and I play RTS games, formerly in Starcraft, but more recently in Age of Empires III.
~/Movies/movie.iso
-bash: ~/Movies/movie.iso: cannot execute binary file
You seem to be mistaking permissions with actual executable code.
So, in other words I should use a kludge in order to implement something that IPv6 was supposed to solve?
Mmm, I can't imagine what's hindering adoption.
It's no weirder than IPv6 having 3.41E38 addresses when there's only 6,597,314,781 people in the world.
I don't see that particular right spelled out anywhere except for computer programs. I don't know what definition Title 17 uses for computer programs, but I'm willing to bet it doesn't cover non-executable files, such as audio and video files.
Backup of computer software is, at least in the United States. It's even spelled out in Title 17, Section 117.
Of course, music files and such are probably not considered computer programs by the law, plus circumventing DRM systems is a violation of copyright.
You forgot this is /. The widescreen edition came in a silver cardboard thing. :P
Computer hardware is quite useless without software to run on it. The fact that I had to point this out should raise some serious questions...
Verizon is advertising a package that combats this as well... I didn't find their commercial on youtube, but it's the one with the mom being able to quit her second job because they can now afford texting, pix, and flix... whatever the latter two are.
I have two words for you: voice mail.
Of course, but do you really think they stop and read everything sent to every person in the game?
:P
Granted, if they're BOFHs, they'd probably have it search for specific terms for blackmailing purposes.
I imagine the current reporting system does this: I file a report that someone is spamming me. In doing so, I implicitly give permission to the GMs to take a look at all tells sent to me by that person. They take a look at the communication between us and decide whether or not the person was really spamming.
All this does is automate the reporting step and automatically ignore them as well.
I don't know about for patents, but failure to practice due diligence will get you into trouble in other legal circumstances.