Well, even Microsoft goes after people for parody -- remember www.mikerowesoft.com? Yeah, that would be a clear case of parady, but M$ called it copyright infringement.
Yeah, but there is the whole idea of statute of limitations. You only have so much time from the time that you realize that there is an infringment to file for remedies. So in my mind Intel could simply ask in court, "What rock have you been hiding under for the last six years?" And then win. IANAL, but I think that for something like this the limitation is like four years, but that depends on the state.
This case seems like an attempt to captalize on unproven claims. By chasing after the end-user who does not have knowledge of the internal workings of the chip, it seems predatory. If there was really a valid claim of infringment then Patriot should have chased down Intel, not the end-users. But I guess this is the Intellectual Property game, chase down people that cannot defend themselves and then make money. Isn't that what SCO is saying they are going to do? File suit against an end-user that does not have the money nor the means to be able to prove that there is no infringment and then they win? Or make it so expensive to fight the claims that they cave-in and pay? Personally I would love to see laws that state that you can not hunt down end-users unless the claim for infringment has been proven. And then I would like to see penalities for filing suit against an end-user when someone by-passed the vendor, and the claims are proven wrong. It amounts, (IANAL) in my mind, to perjury -- making false claims in court and hoping that nobody catches you. So on the off chance that there is a closet-techie Congressman reading (heck I'll settle for a member of staff), Congress needs to make sure that intellectual property suits are aimed at vendors first, so the claims can be proven instead of the end-users.
Second, patents need to be tightened. Just because you come up with the idea of having a clock on the chip does not mean that someone else cannot come up with the a simular idea, but implemented in a different way, and make money.
You know, I have tempted to apply for a patent where URL's are spoofed using the latest Microsoft exploit for IE where the %01 is used to hide the real location of a web address. Then I'll sue Microsoft for violating my idea that I "came up with" in high school or something.
That was my exerience. I have been a faithful Spybot fan, and I figured what the heck, so I gave Ad-aware, and it picked up a program that happened to find its way on my machine.
I'll tell you what needs to happen -- is Congress needs to crack down on those pages that try to force you to install a program, aka viewer, in order to look at the web page. I have made quite a bit of money cleaning such things from people who got dupped into downloading and installing programs because it was the only choice they were faced with. The other day I visited a seemingly innocent site and it would not let me close the browser, so I had to CTL-ALT-DEL and then end the task. Spammers and spy/ad-ware people are destined for the same eternal destination.
My experience has been simular in terms of the setup. I wihs the FreeBSD boys would work on that. However, I am happy user. I am using FreeBSD as both a desktop and as a small-scale server, and I have been very happy. It took a lttle playing to get CUPs up, but other than compiing a lot, things went great. The speed asolutely rocks. I am amazed at how fast things run -- even faster when you compile in the ULE scheduler; X was noticably faster.
In other news: The Whitehouse is reported that its website, www.whitehouse.gov is under some sort of DDoS. Apparently, thousands of computers around the world are supplying "http://www.slashdot.org" as atempt to login into the server.
My experience was pleasent, and I am very happy. I have noticed a speed enchangement over 5.1. But I did have a problem with the update. I blew my whole system to pot when I did not uninstall the NVIDIA drivers. Other than that I have noticed that the ports collection is working very nicely, with a few new toys, and that the system is very stable. In fact, I must say that I like the new version much better.
Not much of a review if you ask me. The reviewer did not address anything other than the install. I did not HAVE ANY trouble with the dhclient. In fact I had quite a bit of fun with it and MAC spoofing.
If you read the first letter from SCO to Mr. Roy and then read Mr. Roy's response, you'll notice that Mr. Roy's rewsponse was indeed appropriate.
How you ask? Well, SCO provides nothing more than broadbased and unsubstantiated allegations. The SCO letter says, in essence, "You are using our code." Mr. Roy responded with, "Show me were." Further, SCO threatened to litigate the matter if Just Sports did not respond. The SCO letter tells Mr. Roy that if he wishes to avoid litigation then HE HAS to initiate a buisness relation. You'll notice this idea is proposed via:
"I am requesting a meeting so that we may discuss the alternatives with your firm. WE BELIEVE WE CAN PROPOSE SOLUTIONS THAT WILL BE AGREEABLE AND ECONOMICALLY FEASIBLE FOR YOU....If you fail to respond to our efforts to pursue a licensing arrangement, WE WILL TURN YOUR NAME OVER TO OUR OUTSIDE COUNSEL FOR CONSIDERATION OF LEGAL ACTION"
This whole discussion as to whether the letter was unprofessional or not is stupid. When you look at Mr. Roy's response letter, you will notice that is actually more mature and professional that SCO's. SCO ordered Just Sports to initiate a buisness relationship or face the posiability of legal action. Notice that Just Sports was not given the opportunity to stop using Linux and switch to a "clean" system, SCO said that they have to do buisness.
All Mr. Roy's letter did was say, "We don't believe you," and provide the evidence to substantiate the claim. Furthr, Mr. Roy said that Just Sports and SCO will not talk until the court cases are settled.
And watch the class-action law suit if this software starts delievering content to your phone that you don't want. A cell phone is to provide the user with convience, and that is what you pay for. But if I got an advertisment from a company on my cell phone you had better believe that I would not use that company. It seems that techology is becoming a tool for commercial advertisment to annoy the public. When I fork out my $50 a month for my cell phone, I know that I am paying for my services. I sure as hell don't want to be paying for commercials on my phone to tell me what is the latest and greatest. Frankly if this technology is used to deliever cellular advertisments, I hope that some strip club uses it so that the public outcry will shut it down. And you had better believe if this technology is adopted and used by my cellular providor I will eat the cancellation fee and drop the service. I guess the people inventing this technology do not own cellular devices at all -- because they would know that having a cell phone can be a pain, and the idea of carrrying a commercial with you would make the service undesireable.
The main issue that I see here is a question of juristicion and who has authority. In this case the forum owner has the rights and they are governed by contract. What I believe needs to happen is that a virtual government needs to evolve, and then the anarchy problem would be solved. With a virtual government the Sims would be guarenteed certin rights and then adopt certin responsabilities. Further, Sim congresses or legislatures could evolve.
I guess the point that I am trying to make is that the application of civil rights cannot be enforced in the cyber world without some authority to do the enforcing. Asking a real court to enforce real rights in a virtual world does not make much sense. Rather the virtual worlds need to adopt a sense of sovergnty based on the virtual needs. Think of it as traveling to a different country. When you go to Mexico you don't have the same rights as those in the US. Likewise a Everquest game virtual world does not need nor warrent the same rights and protections as one in Sims Online. Virtual worlds need to rely on there own users and adopt a sense of responsability towards the rights that people need when using a virutal forum.
Has anybody else noticed the irony of this letter and the/. poll today -- your greatest failing as a nerd.
It was somewhat embaressing as my room mate looked at the poll and then said, "You can't check a single one, can you." Yup, it was a said day when a/. poll did not have an option to be a complete nerd.
One the flip side it was rather interesting about the fact that they said that the internet has no social benefit. It is rather awkword in the wording and was very ambiguious. It seems to say to me that the internet is not considered a reliable source of information -- maybe it is my University, but I am encouraged to do my political science research on a computer so that I can get the latest up-to-date information.
If this discussion was reversed, with the FreeBSD people saying the things that are being said by GNU/Linux people in a Linux announcment people would be moderated down fast. I am a FreeBSD fan and as I speak I am installing 5.2. But I can say that I have tried several GNU/Linux installations. In fact I have used Redhat, SuSE, College, Mandrake, Gentoo, Lycoris, and Slackware; I have a dedicated machine to testing, deploying and toying with OpenSource OS'es. After having tried those distributions I was able to determine what I liked the best. Now, having said that my main beef with the GNU/Linux people is that some of them have not taken the time to check out the system. I have taken the time to check out even the different branches of the BSD's and I like FreeBSD the best and I have my reasons.
In fairness to the BSD world, before people open their mouths and start to rant and rave about how BSD sucks and Linux is the best, and vice-versa, people should take the time to test them. Obviously if FreeBSD is now to 5.2 and has active development then it is not dying. Both Linux and the *BSD's have strong points and a week point. But there is no sense making this a religious war. Use whatever OS is best for the job whether that is Mac, Linux, Windows, or a BSD.
Just because I am using FreeBSD and Windows today does not mean that I will stay FreeBSD and Windows. I may switch to FreeBSD and Linux or Linux and Windows.
LOL! I understand the weekly outages. The cap can be found in the AUP. Pretty much they don't provide a utility to tell you how much you have downloaded. They just say that you are obviously doing something illegal. Read the AUP because it is some pretty interesting reading.
In Northern VA you can get Cox Communication for $39 for 3Mbit downstream and 720K upstream cable. If you are not a Cox Cable customer then you get to pay $49 a month. If you want 4MBytes then you will fork out $79 or $99 depending on the upload package you want. You are limited to 30G down a month and 300MB up a month. So for the most part is a great connection. I have been able to download like a freaking fool and have never hit my 30G per month -- since I am not doing file sharing. But I have gathered quite a few ISO's.
If I were Google, I would not be talking too much to SCO. And if I were a Google Exec, I would merely wait for until SCO had left the meeting and then contact the FBI and discuss RECO and extortion charges. It is clear that SCO is planning on using the Google IPO to profit, and by talking to Google just before the IPO it could be construed as an attempt to extort money. I too hope that Google will sqush SCO.
Here is what I don't understand -- what is the point of Broadband if you cannot utilize the bandwidth? I mean, if you are given 1 or 2 or 3 or whatever Mbits down stream, what is the point of having blazing fast internet. If I wanted to have fast web surfing then I would subscribe to a service that give 128K down, not 3 Mbits down stream.
The legacy of paraniod schizaphrenia is going to last forever. As a Republican I am outraged by the invasion of civil liberties and invasion of privacy. Congress does not realize that the Patriot Act, this new bill and others have unbalanced the different branches to where the Presidency and the executive branch reign supreme. The courts do not have the power any more because the civil rights which grant the challenges have been stripped from the defendants. The Congress has no power because of 9/11 sediments.
Orwell was off by twenty years when he wrote 1984.
I honeslty am angered by the fact that the FBI has an ever expanding powers and authority. Now the FBI can get access to anyones financial records and even insurance records. Why should the FBI be given powers to examine records. If the FBI has reason to suspect anybody of wrong doing they should be forced to conduct the investigation under the auspicies of a Court. My prediction is that one of these banks will challenge based on protecting the privacy of consumers.
But I speculate that the Bush Administartion knows that the courts will shoot this one down pretty quick. The Constitution has been interpetted to include protections on Privacy and explicitely protects us from Searches and Siezures with out reason. Over 200 years of case law has stated that in order to conduct a search you need a warent. Over the last few years the Bush Administration has sought to redefine what constitutes unreasonable and get the whole notion of a warrent abolished. But I suspect that the Bush Administration will use the new Big Brother law to get a hold of suspect information that they normally could not get because they have no cause for searching.
I am a republican, but I can tell you this, I will not vote for Bush. I am appaulled at this conduct, and the loose, militaristic interpetation of the Constitution. We need to return to a powerful Congress which has the ability to tell the President where to go and how to get there.
Am I the only one that really does not care or see the controvery hear? I guess my point is if you have such a problem being finger-printed on the way in then don't come. The only thing that I am annoyed with is how come everyone doesn't get finger printed and photographed. If you get a Texas DL you get finger printed and photograhped. The US should be allowed to track people as they come and leave the US. It is the right of the country to deny and admit people into the United States and knowing who is in the country is not a big deal. For the most part the United States Government knows about 99.9% of the polulace from tax records and drivers licenses. It is not so much of a leap nor an extreme injustice to know about the aliens visiting. Just because the US is going to start to track those visiting, and thereby knowing who they are, is no more intrusive than your local DMV, the IRS, Social Security Admin, et al, knowing about you.
Then the other thing that is blowing my mind is how come Brazil is having such a problem with this. I can understand that they feel a little singled out, but this reciprosity seems a little extreme. It is not like the US is singling out Brazilians only -- just those countries were we have the Visa-waiver program in effect.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, even Microsoft goes after people for parody -- remember www.mikerowesoft.com? Yeah, that would be a clear case of parady, but M$ called it copyright infringement.
Yeah, but there is the whole idea of statute of limitations. You only have so much time from the time that you realize that there is an infringment to file for remedies. So in my mind Intel could simply ask in court, "What rock have you been hiding under for the last six years?" And then win. IANAL, but I think that for something like this the limitation is like four years, but that depends on the state.
This case seems like an attempt to captalize on unproven claims. By chasing after the end-user who does not have knowledge of the internal workings of the chip, it seems predatory. If there was really a valid claim of infringment then Patriot should have chased down Intel, not the end-users. But I guess this is the Intellectual Property game, chase down people that cannot defend themselves and then make money. Isn't that what SCO is saying they are going to do? File suit against an end-user that does not have the money nor the means to be able to prove that there is no infringment and then they win? Or make it so expensive to fight the claims that they cave-in and pay? Personally I would love to see laws that state that you can not hunt down end-users unless the claim for infringment has been proven. And then I would like to see penalities for filing suit against an end-user when someone by-passed the vendor, and the claims are proven wrong. It amounts, (IANAL) in my mind, to perjury -- making false claims in court and hoping that nobody catches you. So on the off chance that there is a closet-techie Congressman reading (heck I'll settle for a member of staff), Congress needs to make sure that intellectual property suits are aimed at vendors first, so the claims can be proven instead of the end-users.
Second, patents need to be tightened. Just because you come up with the idea of having a clock on the chip does not mean that someone else cannot come up with the a simular idea, but implemented in a different way, and make money.
You know, I have tempted to apply for a patent where URL's are spoofed using the latest Microsoft exploit for IE where the %01 is used to hide the real location of a web address. Then I'll sue Microsoft for violating my idea that I "came up with" in high school or something.
Didn't those of us that paid for Windows PAY for spyware?
Now the question is -- do I get modded down for flamebait or a troll? Let the bets begin.
That was my exerience. I have been a faithful Spybot fan, and I figured what the heck, so I gave Ad-aware, and it picked up a program that happened to find its way on my machine.
I'll tell you what needs to happen -- is Congress needs to crack down on those pages that try to force you to install a program, aka viewer, in order to look at the web page. I have made quite a bit of money cleaning such things from people who got dupped into downloading and installing programs because it was the only choice they were faced with. The other day I visited a seemingly innocent site and it would not let me close the browser, so I had to CTL-ALT-DEL and then end the task. Spammers and spy/ad-ware people are destined for the same eternal destination.
My experience has been simular in terms of the setup. I wihs the FreeBSD boys would work on that. However, I am happy user. I am using FreeBSD as both a desktop and as a small-scale server, and I have been very happy. It took a lttle playing to get CUPs up, but other than compiing a lot, things went great. The speed asolutely rocks. I am amazed at how fast things run -- even faster when you compile in the ULE scheduler; X was noticably faster.
In other news: The Whitehouse is reported that its website, www.whitehouse.gov is under some sort of DDoS. Apparently, thousands of computers around the world are supplying "http://www.slashdot.org" as atempt to login into the server.
Well, I said grammar, not spelling. But thanks for the double take...
I think you meant: For those interested in false advertising/labeling, whom do you contact to report violations?
We need a /. Mod option for bad grammer. It took me way too long to figure out what the person was trying to say.
My experience was pleasent, and I am very happy. I have noticed a speed enchangement over 5.1. But I did have a problem with the update. I blew my whole system to pot when I did not uninstall the NVIDIA drivers. Other than that I have noticed that the ports collection is working very nicely, with a few new toys, and that the system is very stable. In fact, I must say that I like the new version much better.
Not much of a review if you ask me. The reviewer did not address anything other than the install. I did not HAVE ANY trouble with the dhclient. In fact I had quite a bit of fun with it and MAC spoofing.
How you ask? Well, SCO provides nothing more than broadbased and unsubstantiated allegations. The SCO letter says, in essence, "You are using our code." Mr. Roy responded with, "Show me were." Further, SCO threatened to litigate the matter if Just Sports did not respond. The SCO letter tells Mr. Roy that if he wishes to avoid litigation then HE HAS to initiate a buisness relation. You'll notice this idea is proposed via:
This whole discussion as to whether the letter was unprofessional or not is stupid. When you look at Mr. Roy's response letter, you will notice that is actually more mature and professional that SCO's. SCO ordered Just Sports to initiate a buisness relationship or face the posiability of legal action. Notice that Just Sports was not given the opportunity to stop using Linux and switch to a "clean" system, SCO said that they have to do buisness.
All Mr. Roy's letter did was say, "We don't believe you," and provide the evidence to substantiate the claim. Furthr, Mr. Roy said that Just Sports and SCO will not talk until the court cases are settled.
Christmas. Toys 'R Us. And I worked in "Boy's Toys"
No comment -- I was going to comment on the above post, but wow. MOD PARENT UP to +5, FUNNY!
And watch the class-action law suit if this software starts delievering content to your phone that you don't want. A cell phone is to provide the user with convience, and that is what you pay for. But if I got an advertisment from a company on my cell phone you had better believe that I would not use that company. It seems that techology is becoming a tool for commercial advertisment to annoy the public. When I fork out my $50 a month for my cell phone, I know that I am paying for my services. I sure as hell don't want to be paying for commercials on my phone to tell me what is the latest and greatest. Frankly if this technology is used to deliever cellular advertisments, I hope that some strip club uses it so that the public outcry will shut it down. And you had better believe if this technology is adopted and used by my cellular providor I will eat the cancellation fee and drop the service. I guess the people inventing this technology do not own cellular devices at all -- because they would know that having a cell phone can be a pain, and the idea of carrrying a commercial with you would make the service undesireable.
The main issue that I see here is a question of juristicion and who has authority. In this case the forum owner has the rights and they are governed by contract. What I believe needs to happen is that a virtual government needs to evolve, and then the anarchy problem would be solved. With a virtual government the Sims would be guarenteed certin rights and then adopt certin responsabilities. Further, Sim congresses or legislatures could evolve.
I guess the point that I am trying to make is that the application of civil rights cannot be enforced in the cyber world without some authority to do the enforcing. Asking a real court to enforce real rights in a virtual world does not make much sense. Rather the virtual worlds need to adopt a sense of sovergnty based on the virtual needs. Think of it as traveling to a different country. When you go to Mexico you don't have the same rights as those in the US. Likewise a Everquest game virtual world does not need nor warrent the same rights and protections as one in Sims Online. Virtual worlds need to rely on there own users and adopt a sense of responsability towards the rights that people need when using a virutal forum.
Has anybody else noticed the irony of this letter and the /. poll today -- your greatest failing as a nerd.
/. poll did not have an option to be a complete nerd.
It was somewhat embaressing as my room mate looked at the poll and then said, "You can't check a single one, can you." Yup, it was a said day when a
One the flip side it was rather interesting about the fact that they said that the internet has no social benefit. It is rather awkword in the wording and was very ambiguious. It seems to say to me that the internet is not considered a reliable source of information -- maybe it is my University, but I am encouraged to do my political science research on a computer so that I can get the latest up-to-date information.
Oh well...
If this discussion was reversed, with the FreeBSD people saying the things that are being said by GNU/Linux people in a Linux announcment people would be moderated down fast. I am a FreeBSD fan and as I speak I am installing 5.2. But I can say that I have tried several GNU/Linux installations. In fact I have used Redhat, SuSE, College, Mandrake, Gentoo, Lycoris, and Slackware; I have a dedicated machine to testing, deploying and toying with OpenSource OS'es. After having tried those distributions I was able to determine what I liked the best. Now, having said that my main beef with the GNU/Linux people is that some of them have not taken the time to check out the system. I have taken the time to check out even the different branches of the BSD's and I like FreeBSD the best and I have my reasons.
In fairness to the BSD world, before people open their mouths and start to rant and rave about how BSD sucks and Linux is the best, and vice-versa, people should take the time to test them. Obviously if FreeBSD is now to 5.2 and has active development then it is not dying. Both Linux and the *BSD's have strong points and a week point. But there is no sense making this a religious war. Use whatever OS is best for the job whether that is Mac, Linux, Windows, or a BSD.
Just because I am using FreeBSD and Windows today does not mean that I will stay FreeBSD and Windows. I may switch to FreeBSD and Linux or Linux and Windows.
Why not simply make a urlframe or urlredirect for www.litigiousbastards.com/.org/.net/.cc/et al. Then submit it is Goolge for inclusion?
As well as: slashdot.bz slashdot.ws slashdot.nu slashdot.com.cn slashdot.net.cn slashdot.org.cn slashdot.tm and my personal favorite: slashdot.kids.us
LOL! I understand the weekly outages. The cap can be found in the AUP. Pretty much they don't provide a utility to tell you how much you have downloaded. They just say that you are obviously doing something illegal. Read the AUP because it is some pretty interesting reading.
In Northern VA you can get Cox Communication for $39 for 3Mbit downstream and 720K upstream cable. If you are not a Cox Cable customer then you get to pay $49 a month. If you want 4MBytes then you will fork out $79 or $99 depending on the upload package you want. You are limited to 30G down a month and 300MB up a month. So for the most part is a great connection. I have been able to download like a freaking fool and have never hit my 30G per month -- since I am not doing file sharing. But I have gathered quite a few ISO's.
If I were Google, I would not be talking too much to SCO. And if I were a Google Exec, I would merely wait for until SCO had left the meeting and then contact the FBI and discuss RECO and extortion charges. It is clear that SCO is planning on using the Google IPO to profit, and by talking to Google just before the IPO it could be construed as an attempt to extort money. I too hope that Google will sqush SCO.
Here is what I don't understand -- what is the point of Broadband if you cannot utilize the bandwidth? I mean, if you are given 1 or 2 or 3 or whatever Mbits down stream, what is the point of having blazing fast internet. If I wanted to have fast web surfing then I would subscribe to a service that give 128K down, not 3 Mbits down stream.
The legacy of paraniod schizaphrenia is going to last forever. As a Republican I am outraged by the invasion of civil liberties and invasion of privacy. Congress does not realize that the Patriot Act, this new bill and others have unbalanced the different branches to where the Presidency and the executive branch reign supreme. The courts do not have the power any more because the civil rights which grant the challenges have been stripped from the defendants. The Congress has no power because of 9/11 sediments.
Orwell was off by twenty years when he wrote 1984.
I honeslty am angered by the fact that the FBI has an ever expanding powers and authority. Now the FBI can get access to anyones financial records and even insurance records. Why should the FBI be given powers to examine records. If the FBI has reason to suspect anybody of wrong doing they should be forced to conduct the investigation under the auspicies of a Court. My prediction is that one of these banks will challenge based on protecting the privacy of consumers.
But I speculate that the Bush Administartion knows that the courts will shoot this one down pretty quick. The Constitution has been interpetted to include protections on Privacy and explicitely protects us from Searches and Siezures with out reason. Over 200 years of case law has stated that in order to conduct a search you need a warent. Over the last few years the Bush Administration has sought to redefine what constitutes unreasonable and get the whole notion of a warrent abolished. But I suspect that the Bush Administration will use the new Big Brother law to get a hold of suspect information that they normally could not get because they have no cause for searching.
I am a republican, but I can tell you this, I will not vote for Bush. I am appaulled at this conduct, and the loose, militaristic interpetation of the Constitution. We need to return to a powerful Congress which has the ability to tell the President where to go and how to get there.
Am I the only one that really does not care or see the controvery hear? I guess my point is if you have such a problem being finger-printed on the way in then don't come. The only thing that I am annoyed with is how come everyone doesn't get finger printed and photographed. If you get a Texas DL you get finger printed and photograhped. The US should be allowed to track people as they come and leave the US. It is the right of the country to deny and admit people into the United States and knowing who is in the country is not a big deal. For the most part the United States Government knows about 99.9% of the polulace from tax records and drivers licenses. It is not so much of a leap nor an extreme injustice to know about the aliens visiting. Just because the US is going to start to track those visiting, and thereby knowing who they are, is no more intrusive than your local DMV, the IRS, Social Security Admin, et al, knowing about you.
Then the other thing that is blowing my mind is how come Brazil is having such a problem with this. I can understand that they feel a little singled out, but this reciprosity seems a little extreme. It is not like the US is singling out Brazilians only -- just those countries were we have the Visa-waiver program in effect.
This is seriously a non-issue.