OSDL released a Q&A today written by Lawrence Rosen, noted expert on technology and intellectual property law. The Q&A points to serious flaws in SCO's claims that end-users have to pay for Linux licenses." The press release is a little more diplomatic, saying that the document only helps one determine whether or not one should buy a license from SCO.
Oooh! I don't have to read the article, I am going to guess... NO! Anyone who purchases a license from SCO is either extremely paranoid, or a moron. Granted, I would be paranoid too with the ammount of money that these lawsuits are generating.
The real question is will Al Franken defeat the "Fair and Balanced" Fox News.
Would it be legal for me to get a copyright for the worlds first dancing monkey rocket ship pen, and then email everyone in the free world to cease and desist using my dancing monkey rocket ship pen?
Now replace "dancing monkey rocket ship pen" with something that a lawyer team would actually have to do research for, i.e. spend money to figure out if they are using my ip, and what legal actions they have, so on.....
That is exactly how I handled it as a tech, although I would have explained right click when I asked for it.
Being as that is almost word for word the exact thing that I did, you would have to admit that every call does not always go that smoothly, and those are the ones that cause the general complaining.
I've worked for a local ISP with the cheapest rates in Indiana, and I had numerous calls with people in which getting to dialup networking was a 30 minute conversation.
After that I moved on to working for a large insurance company, and dealing with internal clients. Much easier to deal with.
They have just enough information to help me out, and if they do not, I ask to speak with their supervisor, and have them walk through the process.
Never a problem, unless dealing with a higher up who felt that their needs for the slightest thing was more important than the needs of everyone else.
Thankfully, I have passed that hurdle in my career, but quite honestly I never minded doing internal support.
I'll be happier when they come up with uses for technology like this that don't involve trying to make advertising more efficient. Minority Report, here we come!
Maybe in a few more years it'll be nice, when you can point your phone at a movie poster and watch the trailer for the film.
Isn't the trailer for a film advertising?
Those movie trailers start making me want to see films I normally wouldn't. I saw a trailer for some new Crocodile Dundee film, and everyone I was with had the same reaction.
There is no way this movie will be any good, but damn if they didn't make it look like it might.
Re:this better not replace what's already at museu
on
Real-World Hyperlinks
·
· Score: 1
I agree entirely. I think cell phone conversations should be banned in public places such as museums. I don't care much for the cell phone being there or not, I just don't want to have to listen to someone talk.
Regardless, I wouldn't want this for a museum anyway. I don't want to have any insight, aside from maybe a bit of conversation from friends, regarding art.
I gain my own opinions, connotations, and feeling regarding art without anyone force feeding how I should feel. I honestly don't quite get an explination next to a piece either, I'd rather just explore what I think/feel about it myself, although understand others may be different.
Pointing your cellphone to a picture, and getting an idea of what you should have gotten from it kind of defeats the purpose in my opinion.
I beleive (and it is ambigous) that the article poster was saying 'It's unfortunate because Wal-Mart didn't kill the idea of the RFID completely'. The concept of the RFID is very much disfavored by the Slashdot crowd, and the poster was simply playing to that.
Putting RFID in the individual packages doesn't really affect their distribution model too much, since they're scanning everything with bar codes in the checkout line anyway.
In practice, it's not such a big deal if you can disable the RFID tags after purchsing the product. There's no guarantee the store will do this (it may be in their best interests *not* to do this) and telling people how to do this themselves will probably violate DMCA, not to mention state and local laws.
Why does it feel as though if I stare at someone the wrong way, I may be violating the DMCA?
What exactly is "unfortunate" about this? If it doesn't make it into a consumer product at the point of sale, what FSCKING harm is it doing? (as far as it goes, even if it DOES make it into a consumer product at the point of sale, if 1) they disclose that it's there and optionally 2) they make it removeable (part of packaging, on a removable tag, etc) I fail to see how this is a problem. If they disclose and don't make it removeable, I don't have to buy that product, do I?
Do mods even read the article, the article summary, or the post they are moderating?
This was moderated as Insightful. Heavily moderated as Insightful.
The Summary was saying it was unfortunate that they are NOT deploying the new technology.
You are upset at the summary for dissing the new technology. They are not.
They are saying it's unfortunate that it isn't being deployed.
Heavily practicing censorship was just the beggining. It's sad that Walmart can get away with such and things and still be so profitable, because in the end, they are still the cheapest.
I'm not sure it is because they are the cheapest.
I don't shop there because of their practices. I avoid the place like the plague.
However, I bet there are many, many, many more people that go to Walmart because of that specific reason.
Because they are gung-ho $$$ grabbing with a heavy dose of Christinanity thrown in.
Unfortunately, it looks like they are canceling it to focus on the use of the same technology in the warehouses and distribution centers instead, and waiting for the cost to come down before using the RFIDs in the stores.
Personally, I think it's a much better idea to use the technology in warehouses and distribution first. Hell, I can't beileve they'd even consider moving to a full scale store deployment before a long bit of testing in warehouses.
I think this is a smart move by Walmart, regardless of the precieved failure that may come by such bold claims, and then a back down.
If you were aware, say, that said girl has been playing games for most of her life, still plays them quite regularly, and is easily as skilled as most gamers, then you wouldn't take it so badly?
Not so badly. Correct. If she was attractive, I would even make it a running joke, recounting the story amongst my friends.
Chalk up one more that doesn't play it - I've never even touched the game. Still addicted to Diablo II however...
I have a lot of respect for girls who play competitive video games with the guys. The girls I know who play the sims, and only the sims, or some other game akin to that are not gamers.
The gamer chicks are usually the girlfriends of my friends, who some are better than their boyfriends.
They talk shit, they eat pizza, drink mountain dew, look good in a t-shirt and jeans, and can use a rocket launcher way better than I..... and starfall.
Slashdot Mirror
OSDL released a Q&A today written by Lawrence Rosen, noted expert on technology and intellectual property law. The Q&A points to serious flaws in SCO's claims that end-users have to pay for Linux licenses." The press release is a little more diplomatic, saying that the document only helps one determine whether or not one should buy a license from SCO.
Oooh! I don't have to read the article, I am going to guess... NO! Anyone who purchases a license from SCO is either extremely paranoid, or a moron. Granted, I would be paranoid too with the ammount of money that these lawsuits are generating.
The real question is will Al Franken defeat the "Fair and Balanced" Fox News.
"Actually, I and all /.ers hope all are safe and well."
Speak for yourself! I'm cheering the mob on!
Would it be legal for me to get a copyright for the worlds first dancing monkey rocket ship pen, and then email everyone in the free world to cease and desist using my dancing monkey rocket ship pen?
Now replace "dancing monkey rocket ship pen" with something that a lawyer team would actually have to do research for, i.e. spend money to figure out if they are using my ip, and what legal actions they have, so on.....
That is exactly how I handled it as a tech, although I would have explained right click when I asked for it.
Being as that is almost word for word the exact thing that I did, you would have to admit that every call does not always go that smoothly, and those are the ones that cause the general complaining.
I've worked for a local ISP with the cheapest rates in Indiana, and I had numerous calls with people in which getting to dialup networking was a 30 minute conversation.
After that I moved on to working for a large insurance company, and dealing with internal clients. Much easier to deal with.
They have just enough information to help me out, and if they do not, I ask to speak with their supervisor, and have them walk through the process.
Never a problem, unless dealing with a higher up who felt that their needs for the slightest thing was more important than the needs of everyone else.
Thankfully, I have passed that hurdle in my career, but quite honestly I never minded doing internal support.
Garfield and Charlie Brown say "Arrgggg!"
Garfield sleeps, so I will discount your post as an obvious attempt to troll, and discredit me.
ARRRRRRRRRRRRHHHHHHHHHHH
(real slow day at work...)
Is some guy wearing a sign going to jump in front of me and start blathering on about casinos or cheap travel discounts?
"Buy my book, Buy my book, Buy my book" - Jay Sherman
See, what made it funny (note the moderation) is that you don't GO to the rental place anymore, you just use P2P to download it! Ha! Get it?
Oh! Cause we are all software pirates! Pirates are funny cause they say, "Arrrgggg!"
Hahaha, I like pirates. Thank you.
I'll be happier when they come up with uses for technology like this that don't involve trying to make advertising more efficient. Minority Report, here we come!
Maybe in a few more years it'll be nice, when you can point your phone at a movie poster and watch the trailer for the film.
Isn't the trailer for a film advertising?
Those movie trailers start making me want to see films I normally wouldn't. I saw a trailer for some new Crocodile Dundee film, and everyone I was with had the same reaction.
There is no way this movie will be any good, but damn if they didn't make it look like it might.
I agree entirely. I think cell phone conversations should be banned in public places such as museums. I don't care much for the cell phone being there or not, I just don't want to have to listen to someone talk.
Regardless, I wouldn't want this for a museum anyway. I don't want to have any insight, aside from maybe a bit of conversation from friends, regarding art.
I gain my own opinions, connotations, and feeling regarding art without anyone force feeding how I should feel. I honestly don't quite get an explination next to a piece either, I'd rather just explore what I think/feel about it myself, although understand others may be different.
Pointing your cellphone to a picture, and getting an idea of what you should have gotten from it kind of defeats the purpose in my opinion.
Won't anyone think of the privacy rights of the poor cats and dogs?? This is outrageous!!!!!!!
Can a dog be in violation of the DCMA for chewing the tag off?
I beleive (and it is ambigous) that the article poster was saying 'It's unfortunate because Wal-Mart didn't kill the idea of the RFID completely'. The concept of the RFID is very much disfavored by the Slashdot crowd, and the poster was simply playing to that.
I honestly didn't read it that way at all.
If that's the case, sorry.
Putting RFID in the individual packages doesn't really affect their distribution model too much, since they're scanning everything with bar codes in the checkout line anyway.
:)
Exactly. You stated that better than I did.
In practice, it's not such a big deal if you can disable the RFID tags after purchsing the product. There's no guarantee the store will do this (it may be in their best interests *not* to do this) and telling people how to do this themselves will probably violate DMCA, not to mention state and local laws.
Why does it feel as though if I stare at someone the wrong way, I may be violating the DMCA?
Is it just me?
Didn't they start censoring their video games and pulling magazines because customers complained? How is that not listening?
He meant listening to us.
What exactly is "unfortunate" about this? If it doesn't make it into a consumer product at the point of sale, what FSCKING harm is it doing? (as far as it goes, even if it DOES make it into a consumer product at the point of sale, if 1) they disclose that it's there and optionally 2) they make it removeable (part of packaging, on a removable tag, etc) I fail to see how this is a problem. If they disclose and don't make it removeable, I don't have to buy that product, do I?
Do mods even read the article, the article summary, or the post they are moderating?
This was moderated as Insightful. Heavily moderated as Insightful.
The Summary was saying it was unfortunate that they are NOT deploying the new technology.
You are upset at the summary for dissing the new technology. They are not.
They are saying it's unfortunate that it isn't being deployed.
How did this get modded up so high?
Most of retail theft is by employees, what is the problem of wal mart protecting their products?
I would assume most retail theft occurs when the product is actually in the store, but I could be wrong.
If that was the case, then wouldn't it be a much better idea to continue if protecting their products were the reason.
In my view, for a new technology to be tested, it's a much more sterile enviornment in a warehouse.
Which will give you a better idea of the trials of an in store debut.
Heavily practicing censorship was just the beggining. It's sad that Walmart can get away with such and things and still be so profitable, because in the end, they are still the cheapest.
I'm not sure it is because they are the cheapest.
I don't shop there because of their practices. I avoid the place like the plague.
However, I bet there are many, many, many more people that go to Walmart because of that specific reason.
Because they are gung-ho $$$ grabbing with a heavy dose of Christinanity thrown in.
Unfortunately, it looks like they are canceling it to focus on the use of the same technology in the warehouses and distribution centers instead, and waiting for the cost to come down before using the RFIDs in the stores.
Personally, I think it's a much better idea to use the technology in warehouses and distribution first. Hell, I can't beileve they'd even consider moving to a full scale store deployment before a long bit of testing in warehouses.
I think this is a smart move by Walmart, regardless of the precieved failure that may come by such bold claims, and then a back down.
Socializing online doesnt helps in real life. If you get stuck.
Socializing online, and creating a web server, as well as trying out new concepts helped with my profession.
or have some problem in real life the online gamers wont come to help you or give you a hand
I've had friends write a bit of perl script for me, debug why my soundcard wouldn't pick up. (Hours of debugging.)
Sitting all day on computer, not caring to develope networks with people in the outside real world.
I get paid for it, which helps me in the real world. Beileve me. It'd be hard to live without it.
sitting on a chair
Yeah, Fuck people who sit on chairs.
eating macs and subs and getting fatter everyday
I eat chinese food, and don't dig McDonalds, or Subway, but I have gained 5 pounds in the last few weeks. Thanks for noticing.
getting "F's" in all the subjects and wasting enormous money of yr parents is not a boasting idea.
I have never recieved an F in any subject. I have wasted an enormous ammount of money on my car, but it wasn't my parents.
In a limit everything sounds and works good.
It works well too!
In reality all those who you meet and make friends with face to face will only help and are of use.
Yes, because we all know that no one we have ever met in "reality" has ever stolen anything from us!
That sound you are hearing is a thousand hackers and script kiddies going "Oh yeah?" in unison.
No, That's this.
I think that program is called "real life" :-)
:)
And what is this "real life" you speak of?
I'd hate to spend all day downloading "britney spears" only to find out it was really "Janet Reno".
I'd hope from the "preview" you could tell the difference.
Oh the nightmares a preview would save.
There is some saucy stuff in there that he's written about wife swapping and you thought CS was dull.
Now all we need is a p2p program for that, and we're set.
3. Timothy's a dupe of Taco.
I think you may be on to something.
We must hope that Surak will get all of the Slashdot Gossip for us!
If you were aware, say, that said girl has been playing games for most of her life, still plays them quite regularly, and is easily as skilled as most gamers, then you wouldn't take it so badly?
.... and starfall.
Not so badly. Correct. If she was attractive, I would even make it a running joke, recounting the story amongst my friends.
Chalk up one more that doesn't play it - I've never even touched the game. Still addicted to Diablo II however...
I have a lot of respect for girls who play competitive video games with the guys. The girls I know who play the sims, and only the sims, or some other game akin to that are not gamers.
The gamer chicks are usually the girlfriends of my friends, who some are better than their boyfriends.
They talk shit, they eat pizza, drink mountain dew, look good in a t-shirt and jeans, and can use a rocket launcher way better than I.