So don't license your code under the GPL or other OSS license. Also, find another job. This crap about fewer jobs being bad is nonsense. If the job has already been done, there is no reason to do it over again (except, of course, so that you can make money).
Except that you aren't free to modify the source to fit your needs.
Re:Spill coffee, get rich.
on
RIAA Bits
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
The fact that they served coffee that hot to someone sitting in a CAR makes them partly responsible.
McDonald's is absolutely NOT responsible AT ALL! If the drive thru clerk spilled the coffee on the patron that would be a different story. However, if it is dangerous to have hot coffee in a CAR, then the lady should have had the sense not to purchase it in the drive through. After all, it is dangerous to simply hold a cup while driving, or anything other object for that matter.
Are you one of those people that think that bars that serve people who are obviously MORE than drunk are not partly responsible for that persons actions?
They most certainly are not! This whole argument is utter bullshit. The patron should be responsible for themselves! Blaming everyone else who is nearby for your own actions is a complete cop-out.
If you sell something to someone, you have certain responsibilities as a result of that action.
It has been said before, and I mostly agree that analogies are bad to use in an explanation. However, by this rational, the dealer of your car (if you own one) is responsible (at least partly, right?) when you get into an accident. This is patently absurd.
Wrong. Work-alikes DO violate patents but NOT copyrights.
The Lotus vs. Borland case was based on copyright infringement and that was why it was lost. Patents, on the other hand, apply to methods (which is why software patents are BAD) not actual work.
Slashdot Mirror
Just not atheist.
83% of people who felt like responding. But how many could care less to even respond to the poll.
He was talking about at vehicle, not a webserver. It was under whatever license he described. :)
So don't license your code under the GPL or other OSS license. Also, find another job. This crap about fewer jobs being bad is nonsense. If the job has already been done, there is no reason to do it over again (except, of course, so that you can make money).
Try the GNU/Hurd
Except that you aren't free to modify the source to fit your needs.
The fact that they served coffee that hot to someone sitting in a CAR makes them partly responsible.
McDonald's is absolutely NOT responsible AT ALL! If the drive thru clerk spilled the coffee on the patron that would be a different story. However, if it is dangerous to have hot coffee in a CAR, then the lady should have had the sense not to purchase it in the drive through. After all, it is dangerous to simply hold a cup while driving, or anything other object for that matter.
Are you one of those people that think that bars that serve people who are obviously MORE than drunk are not partly responsible for that persons actions?
They most certainly are not! This whole argument is utter bullshit. The patron should be responsible for themselves! Blaming everyone else who is nearby for your own actions is a complete cop-out.
If you sell something to someone, you have certain responsibilities as a result of that action.
It has been said before, and I mostly agree that analogies are bad to use in an explanation. However, by this rational, the dealer of your car (if you own one) is responsible (at least partly, right?) when you get into an accident. This is patently absurd.
Agreed.
Wrong. Work-alikes DO violate patents but NOT copyrights.
The Lotus vs. Borland case was based on copyright infringement and that was why it was lost. Patents, on the other hand, apply to methods (which is why software patents are BAD) not actual work.
Also, I agree with you on the USPTO being fucked.
Unless the software is patented in your location. :(
References?