If it were my network you wouldn't even be able to install a screen saver, let alone an OS. You also wouldn't have cd-rom access, if you want something off a cd, you submit it to me, wait for me to get time to review it, if I deem it acceptable then you can access the cd via a nfs share. You wouldn't be able to boot knoppix at all. Then again if it were a network I administer you'd probably already be running linux;)
Actually although your point is unchanged by it, the welchia fallout was far far worse than blaster ever was. The simple reason is welchia clogged the bandwidth pipes in a way blaster never dreamed. Effectively cutting off most of net... at least for the state of IL where I work on these issues for users spread all over the state.
Navy get's the best toys and the most funding, the marines are just a subset of it. A respected subset no less, after all they did put bib's in the navy uniform for them.
Umm I didn't read that entire big long thing, just as far as SCO distributing linux itself (until very recently), well in truth SCO is STILL distributing linux via their ftp.
If there is any erm person or group of people you believe are launching frivilous lawsuits in order to mislead investors and pump and dump their stock, the SEC wants to know!!!
Just email your suspicions in this email that is specifically for tips: enforcement@sec.gov
Please do not use this address for general comments or questions.
The MS EULA attempts to control how the software is used.
The GPL only lays out conditions under which you are allowed to distribute the software, the copyright holder's right to do this is explicitly spelled out in the 1976 copyright act. Don't lump the MS EULA and the GPL together, the GPL relaxs restrictions layed out by copyright law under certain terms. The MS EULA relaxes nothing, it further restricts beyond what copyright law does.
Your right stealing is wrong. Copyright infringment is not stealing of course, so your comments are in no way related to this article or discussion. Please stay ontopic.
"When people talk in terms of "it's legally okay to copy a song from the radio" or "it's legally okay to copy three pages, but not the whole book", then they are basically referring to PRAGMATIC copyright interpreations and rulings based on past technological and social circumstance. as technology and social circumstance change, it may become necessary to change (usually tighten) what is allowed in order to best preserve the spirit and intention of copyright, which, again, is to encourage authors."
False, fair use IS defined in the 1976 copyright act.
copyright was fine before it was "amended" for the digital age via the DMCA. The truth of the matter is that copyright owners (myself included) should EITHER have the protection of copyright law or technical measures, they should be mutually exclusive. If you want to rely on technology to give you control beyond what copyright laws give them (and no they are supposed to give temporary LIMITED control of certain aspects of how the works they created are used, this is a tradeup since without copyright law these things would immediately be the property of the public domain) than it should forfeit the legal protection of copyright law.
The only legitimate things illegal under the DMCA were illegal BEFORE the DMCA. Copyright law should not be abolished, it should be reverted back to the original law with an additional clause concerning protecting your works with technical measures and that doing so renders it into the public domain, since these measures restrict in ways protected under fair use.
Patent law is fine as well, but the term should be shortened for technical innovations and it should go back to being exclusively for inventions and not ideas. Ideas aren't supposed to be patentable, which is why we have warehouses full of inventions from back when they required a working copy be submitted. Patents should also be have to genuinely be a new idea, rather than a play off an old one, or taking a brick and mortor concept and applying it to the net. There are maybe 2 or 3 things developed in a decade that should qualify for a patent. Software obviously does not qualify since concepts and ideas aren't supposed to be patentable and software is protected by copyright.
"Are they just trying to alleviate the govt. deficit? It doesn't seem to me the administration really cares about govt deficit."
No there has in fact generally been a surplus of taxes collected which is why there isn't much concern for the deficit... it's being paid on schedule. And quite frankly, it's not like any bill collectors are going to come knocking on the door of the most powerful superpower in the world. As for the bulk which is owed to the citizens of the US, yeah right, they care.
"1) In countries with a high unemployed capacity, sales taxes will be very hurtful, as they will reduce consumption. But in a mature economy like the US, a carefully planned combination of consumption taxes and investment exemptions could encourage savings - and americans save four to five times less than their european counterparts."
Their counterparts in Europe don't exactly have as much to pay for and therefore have more to save. Most basic needs like medical care, education, even housing for deadbeats are taken care of by the state. Sales tax is a relatively small burden compared to any of the above.
"I always wondered what the "multiple or discriminatory taxes on electronic commerce" part of the law included.
It kinda sounds like "we won't tax electronic commerce" to me.
a) Moratorium.--No State or political subdivision thereof shall impose any of the following taxes during the period beginning on October 1, 1998, and ending 3 years after the date of the enactment of this Act--
(1) taxes on Internet access, unless such tax was generally imposed and actually enforced prior to October 1, 1998; and
(2) MULTIPLE OR DISCRIMINATORY TAXES ON ELECTRONIC COMMERCE."
Quoted from another post, you can verify this by reading the bill at a few different places. They are both in the same damn law. This is further backed by the supreme court decision, so that even after this bill expires sat the states still won't be able to do what they want.
Linux and alternatives have until 2006 to gain a significant share of the desktop market, if linux is sitting at about 25-35% by then, microsoft's new lockin DRM scheme probably won't be effective. If not, the DRM scheme will be implemented in hardware effectively elminating all competition from there on in.
Or you could just download it yourself at irc.winbeta.org you have to use the bots in the #winbeta-ads section and to use them you have to join #winbeta and register a nick.
You'll also have to come up with the right dll file from the older build and use it's key since there won't be serial numbers till monday.
"The GPL cannot be made to apply to code without to copyright owner's consent, regardless of whether or not non-GPL'd software has contaminated a GPL'd work."
It most certainly can, in the reverse situation. Non-gpl'd code slipping into a gpl'd work does not license it (unless of course the copyright holder blesses it by distributing it themselves for months after they know it's there as would be the case with SCO). But if a proprietary project put's gpl'd code into their non-gpl'd work, that work most certainly DOES become gpl'd and they've already given their consent by putting the code in there to begin with.
P.S. There is no code, that's why they haven't produced it upfront.
Actually in most states driving IS A RIGHT which has been affirmed under common law and is not invoked through ignorance. I know people who have walked out of driving without a license cases in IL because they were smart enough to pull out the cases between the chicago motor couch and the State of Illinois.
The black box I OWN in MY VEHICLE is no more public than the contents of my vehicle and my trunk. These require a warrant or my permission to examine.
"So making event recorders in car compulsory is therefore legal, and obstructing it's operation shall be deemed the same thing as interfering with the work of police."
Wrong, putting up meters on the roadway to check the speed of vehicles is like putting a police officer on every corner, it's an EXTERNAL force. Requiring me to pay for event recorders that are INTERNAL is a completely different matter. External enforcement is the public's perogative, INTERNAL enforcement requires a warrant.
Slashdot Mirror
boy that is pretty outdated, the European Parliment already legalized software patents.
If it were my network you wouldn't even be able to install a screen saver, let alone an OS. You also wouldn't have cd-rom access, if you want something off a cd, you submit it to me, wait for me to get time to review it, if I deem it acceptable then you can access the cd via a nfs share. You wouldn't be able to boot knoppix at all. Then again if it were a network I administer you'd probably already be running linux ;)
Actually although your point is unchanged by it, the welchia fallout was far far worse than blaster ever was. The simple reason is welchia clogged the bandwidth pipes in a way blaster never dreamed. Effectively cutting off most of net... at least for the state of IL where I work on these issues for users spread all over the state.
At the very least it never ceases to amaze the windows geeks.
Who says they will stop at using this to scan mail? Or to scan for drugs.
Not to mention it's explicitly forbidden in the Constitution.
ummm don't you mean the navy?
Navy get's the best toys and the most funding, the marines are just a subset of it. A respected subset no less, after all they did put bib's in the navy uniform for them.
Umm I didn't read that entire big long thing, just as far as SCO distributing linux itself (until very recently), well in truth SCO is STILL distributing linux via their ftp.
If there is any erm person or group of people you believe are launching frivilous lawsuits in order to mislead investors and pump and dump their stock, the SEC wants to know!!!
Just email your suspicions in this email that is specifically for tips: enforcement@sec.gov
Please do not use this address for general comments or questions.
The MS EULA attempts to control how the software is used.
The GPL only lays out conditions under which you are allowed to distribute the software, the copyright holder's right to do this is explicitly spelled out in the 1976 copyright act. Don't lump the MS EULA and the GPL together, the GPL relaxs restrictions layed out by copyright law under certain terms. The MS EULA relaxes nothing, it further restricts beyond what copyright law does.
So a law taxing interstate sales ON THE INTERNET (whereas they are not taxed on any other medium) would be covered by the law.
Your right stealing is wrong. Copyright infringment is not stealing of course, so your comments are in no way related to this article or discussion. Please stay ontopic.
MIT has a few classes on law, but that pales in comparison to MIT's lawyers. Trust me, MIT already has the best harvard and yale have to offer.
And this is different from me calling in a request how?
"When people talk in terms of "it's legally okay to copy a song from the radio" or "it's legally okay to copy three pages, but not the whole book", then they are basically referring to PRAGMATIC copyright interpreations and rulings based on past technological and social circumstance. as technology and social circumstance change, it may become necessary to change (usually tighten) what is allowed in order to best preserve the spirit and intention of copyright, which, again, is to encourage authors."
False, fair use IS defined in the 1976 copyright act.
copyright was fine before it was "amended" for the digital age via the DMCA. The truth of the matter is that copyright owners (myself included) should EITHER have the protection of copyright law or technical measures, they should be mutually exclusive. If you want to rely on technology to give you control beyond what copyright laws give them (and no they are supposed to give temporary LIMITED control of certain aspects of how the works they created are used, this is a tradeup since without copyright law these things would immediately be the property of the public domain) than it should forfeit the legal protection of copyright law.
The only legitimate things illegal under the DMCA were illegal BEFORE the DMCA. Copyright law should not be abolished, it should be reverted back to the original law with an additional clause concerning protecting your works with technical measures and that doing so renders it into the public domain, since these measures restrict in ways protected under fair use.
Patent law is fine as well, but the term should be shortened for technical innovations and it should go back to being exclusively for inventions and not ideas. Ideas aren't supposed to be patentable, which is why we have warehouses full of inventions from back when they required a working copy be submitted. Patents should also be have to genuinely be a new idea, rather than a play off an old one, or taking a brick and mortor concept and applying it to the net. There are maybe 2 or 3 things developed in a decade that should qualify for a patent. Software obviously does not qualify since concepts and ideas aren't supposed to be patentable and software is protected by copyright.
The very concept of IP is immoral, so I guess it just goes hand in hand.
"Are they just trying to alleviate the govt. deficit? It doesn't seem to me the administration really cares about govt deficit."
No there has in fact generally been a surplus of taxes collected which is why there isn't much concern for the deficit... it's being paid on schedule. And quite frankly, it's not like any bill collectors are going to come knocking on the door of the most powerful superpower in the world. As for the bulk which is owed to the citizens of the US, yeah right, they care.
"1) In countries with a high unemployed capacity, sales taxes will be very hurtful, as they will reduce consumption. But in a mature economy like the US, a carefully planned combination of consumption taxes and investment exemptions could encourage savings - and americans save four to five times less than their european counterparts."
Their counterparts in Europe don't exactly have as much to pay for and therefore have more to save. Most basic needs like medical care, education, even housing for deadbeats are taken care of by the state. Sales tax is a relatively small burden compared to any of the above.
"I always wondered what the "multiple or discriminatory taxes on electronic commerce" part of the law included.
It kinda sounds like "we won't tax electronic commerce" to me.
a) Moratorium.--No State or political subdivision thereof shall impose any of the following taxes during the period beginning on October 1, 1998, and ending 3 years after the date of the enactment of this Act--
(1) taxes on Internet access, unless such tax was generally imposed and actually enforced prior to October 1, 1998; and
(2) MULTIPLE OR DISCRIMINATORY TAXES ON ELECTRONIC COMMERCE."
Quoted from another post, you can verify this by reading the bill at a few different places. They are both in the same damn law. This is further backed by the supreme court decision, so that even after this bill expires sat the states still won't be able to do what they want.
Linux and alternatives have until 2006 to gain a significant share of the desktop market, if linux is sitting at about 25-35% by then, microsoft's new lockin DRM scheme probably won't be effective. If not, the DRM scheme will be implemented in hardware effectively elminating all competition from there on in.
Nah they are just forcing upgrades by not putting new features in the standalone IE. Longhorn already has popup blocking in IE.
Or you could just download it yourself at irc.winbeta.org you have to use the bots in the #winbeta-ads section and to use them you have to join #winbeta and register a nick.
You'll also have to come up with the right dll file from the older build and use it's key since there won't be serial numbers till monday.
I hear they finally added animations to the blue screens!!!
Your assuming the recent market trend will stop and MS won't continue to lose desktop market share like they just did for the first time in a decade ;)
"The GPL cannot be made to apply to code without to copyright owner's consent, regardless of whether or not non-GPL'd software has contaminated a GPL'd work."
It most certainly can, in the reverse situation. Non-gpl'd code slipping into a gpl'd work does not license it (unless of course the copyright holder blesses it by distributing it themselves for months after they know it's there as would be the case with SCO). But if a proprietary project put's gpl'd code into their non-gpl'd work, that work most certainly DOES become gpl'd and they've already given their consent by putting the code in there to begin with.
P.S. There is no code, that's why they haven't produced it upfront.
Actually in most states driving IS A RIGHT which has been affirmed under common law and is not invoked through ignorance. I know people who have walked out of driving without a license cases in IL because they were smart enough to pull out the cases between the chicago motor couch and the State of Illinois.
The black box I OWN in MY VEHICLE is no more public than the contents of my vehicle and my trunk. These require a warrant or my permission to examine.
"So making event recorders in car compulsory is therefore legal, and obstructing it's operation shall be deemed the same thing as interfering with the work of police."
Wrong, putting up meters on the roadway to check the speed of vehicles is like putting a police officer on every corner, it's an EXTERNAL force. Requiring me to pay for event recorders that are INTERNAL is a completely different matter. External enforcement is the public's perogative, INTERNAL enforcement requires a warrant.