"And McNealy's challenge to IBM to open source db2 is silly too; sun makes no money from selling java licenses (duh, they're free), where as IBM does make money from db2."
Sun does make money from Java. They license certification tools so that people can claim 100% Pure Java Certified and use the java logo. They make money from licensing the source code, they make money from licensing distribution rights for the JRE and JDK.
While you can distribute the JRE, you can only do so if you aren distributing it for the purpose of running your application.
You cannot distribute the JDK unless you pay for that right.
"But, as a developer, I would be very wary of using something that requires my potential users to download and install a Java runtime just for my application. That will likely ensure that most potential users remain potential."
So distribute it with the JRE. In fact some Java installers can recognize if a JRE is installed, if not they will install one.
only problem is this stupid part i the JRE license regarding distribution:
and (v) agree to defend and indemnify Sun and its licensors from and
against any damages, costs, ! liabilities, settlement amounts and/or
expenses (including attorneys' fees) incurred in connection with any
claim, lawsuit or action by any third party that arises or results from
the use or distribution of any and all Programs and/or Software.
But you can write your license to protect yourself from that as well.
"Here is where your wrong though. The last thing truly free OSS distros need to do is start included software that isn't FOSS. That would be a huge mistake."
I'm not wrong. I'm making a point. It's the OSS community and IBM that asked for Java to be open sourced. Sun isn't breathing down people's necks trying to get them to include Java in their distros are they?
If Java was opene sourced, who would be the people most likely to contribute anything useful to it? It would be people like IBM and other big Java/J2EE companies. They would get to contribute without paying Sun. Right now most of them (the ones that need it anyway) have paid licensing agreements with sun for access to source code and distribution rights. What are they doing with Java? Well their making software to build things on Java and selling it for a lot of money or making a lot of money on consulting.
There are OSS variants of java, Gnue Classpath, GCJ, Kaffe. They are nowhere near as complete as the commercial Javas are. As much as people complain about how slow Sun is to make changes to Java. Well, they go with through a community review process that anyone can join and they still manage to stay ahead of the OSS Javas. Open sourcing Java would make it easier for the OSS Javas to be able to release a compatible version within a reasonable time. How does that benefit Sun or the Java community? Also if Sun's java is OSed, what is going to happen to those free javas?
Linux Distro's could customize their JVM's to perform better on their distros and make money on it. If any Linux distributor really thought they could make a killing shipping a finely tuned Java/Linux platform why shouldn't they have to pay for it? There is a market for that and the distro's that have paid for the source licensing to do that have been quite successful.
Who does that leave? The distro's that want to make money shipping cd's like Debian. Sun does have 'scholorship' type programs for non profit entities to get great deals on licensing.
I'm all for Sun loosening their distribution licensing at no cost. I'd love to see Debian have a taskel option for J2EE server that automatically installs and configures tomcat/java/apache right out of the box. That would help Sun and Java. Open Sourcing it just helps the people that don't want to pay for it.
"Because many distros will not ship non-free software by default. This greatly limits the usefulness of Java as a general development language for Linux applications. They are shooting themselves in the foot on this one."
Is that Sun's problem or the Distro's problem?
Someone who doesn't know enough to install the JDK on their computer on their own from a package that is already included in their distro (just not in the 'free' section) probably wouldn't be able to develop in it. If you like java, you can install it, you can use it.
Maybe the linux distributors should be a little more open regarding what programs they would like to include.
Look at sourceforge. The number of open source projects written with java is huge.
It's not sun that's going to lose out by not open sourcing java. I'm not trying to sound negative. People are deploying java apps on linux all the time. Especially web applications.
It seems like the OS community wants sun to do it out of principle. None of the arguments made really hold up in my opinion.
Guess they don't make teaching fellows like they used to.
"There simply has not been any study of the quantity of 'bad' patents versus 'good' patents."
Ok.... so what does that have to do with discussions about bad patents? " Given all the discussions about how so many bad patents are being granted, "
There has also been a surge in the number of patents. If next year we had 30 times more movies made than last year, would you think someone inven ted some magical pill that awakens our deep cinemagraphic abilities?
"Ironic, because $25-30 million is about the total price increase Viacom was seeking."
If that's the case, all the more reason to respect Echostar and Charlie.
They talked about the fact that they were doing this because they didn't want to get bullied because they thought what Viacom was doing was illegal and unfair. If they really are going to reimburse about as much as Viacom was seeking, it's like telling Viacom... "Screw you, it's not about the money, you're a bunch of asses, now we're taking that money and giving it to our customers!" Or close to that:)
We need more companies that stand up to other companies like this (not like walmart).
This is old news. Some of the big companies don't admit it but the reason we can have some great technologies available and the amount of scalability in some frameworks is because of porn.
I doubt I'd find it if I tried but I remember reading an article about a year or more ago from a big porn site operator taking about the advantages of using J2EE technologies in their high traffic sites. There were also comments about companies using them to fine tune their frameworks because of the real world load they had. I found this article when I wanted to find out more about competing technologies. I specifically wanted to find what the porn industry was using for their websites knowing how much traffic they get. So I stuck with jsp/servlet programming. If it's good enough for half naked women with fake boobs, it's good enough for me!
Unfortunately, people might not go to well for the slogan "Java & J2EE, we help you get sticky."
Porn has helped innovate many industries. It's a shame there's too much of a stigma associated with it and they don't get the recognition they deserve.
You're right. It doesn't cut down on spam at all but it does provide mechanisms for identifying spammers by making it illegal for them to hide. When you can identify spammers it is easier to block them.
"If you believe differently, then you must also believe that I have the right to scream obscenities into your bedroom window with a bullhorn while you're sleeping. Because after all, if you try to stop me, you'd trampling on my right to 'frea speach'."
That's an absurd and overly simple exmple. To use the same anology... It's more like I have a bullhorn set up in a public space and let any one scream whatever they want but I prevent you from using it because I don't like what you say. You don't block any one else from using your mail servers to send you mail? Why spammers.
Don't get the wrong impression. I have to deal with at least 100-300 or more spam messages a day and I have no desire to see spammers be able to have free reign to do what they want. They do however make some valid arguments. It's not a simple matter of "spam is bad, lets block all spam" It is similar to the whole obsenity debate (what is pornography). A lot of the spam blocking will be done at the isp level. What's going to stop some isp from making deals with certain "email marketers" to allow their spam in and not others? ISP's main concern over spam is bandwidth and diskspace. If they can find a way to make money on that bandwidth and diskspace many would jump at it. Lets say we do find a way to get rid of spam... Do you think ISP costs will go down 40-80%?
"we're saying that they have to pay for it themselves.)"
Lets say someone runs across your website. You don't know who they are but they decide to email you. Are they paing for it? Someone reads a comment of yours on slashdot and emails you... do they pay for it as well? Why do spammers have to pay to email you?
When you make a law it has to stand up to the constitution. Just because you don't like something doesn't mean you can ignore the rights. It's not theft in many cases. It is theft when people use open rellays and steal other people's bandwith to send messages. CAN-SPAM does address some of those cases.
Personally, I think it's ok to fight fire with fire. I'd love to see someone write a worm that would go through their emails, identify spam, then track down where it came from. If it finds an open really it tries to let the user know that they are at risk of being exploited or have already been exploited by spammers with instructions on how to fix it. Using the same exploits the spammers use. Is this hypocritical of me? Maybe, but as long as nothing malicious is done and it helps people that don't know what's going on stop contributing to the problem without randombly trying ip addresses and instead searching through spam to find sources so as to reduce bandwidth, maybe it's not that bad. As spammers and others have shown, viral techniques are very effective. Someone just needs to create a good enough antibody. Maybe I'm dreaming though.
"Can you list the exact features required by CAN-SPAM that I can easily filter on?"
You said it yourself "CAN-SPAM makes it illegal to forge your reply-to address" which means you'll know who the email is coming from. Knowing who the email is coming from makes it easier to compile a list of known spammers and block them. It doesn't have to just be by email it can be by domain. Blacklist dns records get updated quite frequently if you use them. Set this up in your server side spam software like spam assasin and you don't have to do anything.
C'Mon...who is going to read email with a subject line like:
"Order Meds V@1|um - XA:n:az ; V|@grA & %RND_MED_VIC+0DIN $.Soma. $ Pnte:r:min LV0J2" anyways?
Obfuscation!?!?!?!? Damn, all this time I thought 133t scRyPT kIdDiEs where concerned about people's health.
Except for some outspoken people that don't know what they're talking about. While people may not like Microsoft, that doesn't mean everything Microsoft does is bad. People and corporate entities are very complex. While you can like something someone does, doesn't mean you like every thing they do. If you hate something someone does, doesn't mean you hate that person or everything they do. To see things otherwise is very simplistic. Unfortunately we have a lot of simple people out there.
To quote Live:
"this is not a black and white world
to be alive i say the colors must swirl
and i believe that maybe today
we will all get to appreciate
the beauty of grey":)
That't kind of the point of the CANSPAM act. If you're doing it out in the open, you have to abide by the new law as well as your isp's spam policies. If you don't, you can be traced.
If you're going underground, you're breaking the law, which gives companies the legal right to issue supbeanas to track down who you are that way.
A lot of people complain about the CANSPAM act saying it makes it legal to send spam. I disagree. While it doesn't make all solicited spam illegal, it does define legal terms for which you can send spam. The reason people have been using these covert techniques to relay spam is because if they use what is now considered legal, they can easily be filtered by users/ISP's that choose to. It doesn't eliminate spam but it should help cut it down without trampling on free speach.
Also lets not forget. These licenses for Linux are not licenses for Linux. They are licenses to use SCO's IP in binary form. "Sure we'll take that, we still need to support UnixWare". 6 months later "Oh, they're calling them Linux licenses now? Those bastards!"
Canopy didn't do this overtly as you claim. The terms of the settlement were covered by a strict NDA. Had CA not felt that Canopy had already violated the NDA, CA would not have come public with it.
"It doesn't matter whether they acknowledge it or not. It *WAS* wrong. "
The fact that it was wrong apparently doesn't mean much. While EB broke they law, they didn't steal the actual items from her. Just because they're wrong doesn't mean that she won't have to go to court to fight it. Who knows. By that time, maybe they would have sold all her stuff. Why haven't the policed taken the property back? I would have thought they would have at least taken it as evidence. Maybe they don't need evidence since they have a confession.
The point is this. If they give people like this a hard time in getting their stolen property back, chances are some people might not bother going through the legal expense to get them back. If they just give the items back easily, they'll be expected to do so every time.
That's my point... this doesn't seem like this was a one time thing. They're acting as if they have to worry about a lot of similiar type incidents. I'm not saying what they're doing is excusable. I'm saying their actions indicate someone should look into this further and see if there were other such cases. Their actions lead me to believe there are.
Also, consider that just because someone does something wrong, doesn't mean they automatically have to make it up to the person that was wronged. The theif in this instance is going to be punished in some way. The punishment isn't really going to benefit the victim. Maybe he goes to jail, does community service or something. If the victim wants some sort of restitution they have to do so in civil court. Same thing with EB. Like when the SEC fines some company for screwing over investors. Do you think any of that money goes back to the investors in most cases? The company does something that screws investors and the SEC collects money for it. The SEC must look forward to companies breaking their regulations.
Ther'es probably a reason why EB doesn't return the goods. Doing so acknowledges that what they did was wrong. They also set a precedent for how they react to this sort of thing, so that if this sort of thing happens (has happened) to another person they would be obliged to retun the money to the other people as well. Not a legal precedent but it does have bearing.
So, lets consider this. The thief knew he could take it to EB and not worry about it. What Florida should be concerned about is not only getting back this woman's property/compensating for illegaly sold property, but also looking into other similar cases. My bet is that either EB is concerned there might be many more, or already knows there are more based on their reaction in this case... why they're not doing the right thing.
"It smells pretty desperate when you won't let your "best" customers comment on what they've bought from you."
Sounds like they didn't even want their customers to know they were their customers.
It is rumoured that Larry Ellison had a dream on monday night in which Darl McBride, dressed in a blue sequen tuxedo, was trying to put a pen in his hand. Ellison thought it was a weird dream until the following day when his assistant let him know the maid turned in what she thought to be important papers found under the bed. Turns out they were SCO Linux license contracts.
In an interview, Ellison's assistant commented on his reacation. "He had an odd look on his face. On the one had relieved that he was not having dreams of McBride holding his hand. On the other completely disgusted. 'It's bad enough he's attacking the linux community, does he have to mock the cruise line magicians as well by dressing like them?' he said", reported his assistant.
In a related story, the headquaters of the compay that runs Ellison's personal security exploded today. There were reports of a Mig fighter plane in the area.
P.S. Only a small fraction of the stuff I make up is really true.
Scroll to the bottome of this page and you will see sco's logo! Why? Is this some sort of mistake or does the page have some sort of time travel cgi written into it?
Don't just look at the pictures on the page. Read what it says.
UnitedLinux was formed by Caldera, Conectiva, SUSE LINUX and Turbolinux to build a single, world-wide Linux standard that customers and partners could work with for world-class, enterprise deployment of Linux.
If you don't know the relationship between SCO and Caldera you've had your head in the sand in regards to this topic?
Who in their right mind would mark this insightful!?!?!?!?!
You're right that Software Express is the program that gives early access to new Sun Software. Solaris Express is the program that gives early access to the new versions of solaris "The Solaris Express program can help anyone needing access to the latest innovations from Sun, "
Still... "available in solaris express (the pre-release of Solaris 10). " implies that solaris express is the pre-release of Solaris 10, which it isn't. Solaris Express is the program by which you can get Solaris 10.
Every where I read about Solaris 10, they call it Solaris Express, except on Sun's site. I don't know if there's confusion because someone refered to Solaris 10 as Solaris X (roman numeral)
Slashdot Mirror
Sun does make money from Java. They license certification tools so that people can claim 100% Pure Java Certified and use the java logo. They make money from licensing the source code, they make money from licensing distribution rights for the JRE and JDK.
While you can distribute the JRE, you can only do so if you aren distributing it for the purpose of running your application.
You cannot distribute the JDK unless you pay for that right.
So distribute it with the JRE. In fact some Java installers can recognize if a JRE is installed, if not they will install one.
only problem is this stupid part i the JRE license regarding distribution:
But you can write your license to protect yourself from that as well.I'm not wrong. I'm making a point. It's the OSS community and IBM that asked for Java to be open sourced. Sun isn't breathing down people's necks trying to get them to include Java in their distros are they?
If Java was opene sourced, who would be the people most likely to contribute anything useful to it? It would be people like IBM and other big Java/J2EE companies. They would get to contribute without paying Sun. Right now most of them (the ones that need it anyway) have paid licensing agreements with sun for access to source code and distribution rights. What are they doing with Java? Well their making software to build things on Java and selling it for a lot of money or making a lot of money on consulting.
There are OSS variants of java, Gnue Classpath, GCJ, Kaffe. They are nowhere near as complete as the commercial Javas are. As much as people complain about how slow Sun is to make changes to Java. Well, they go with through a community review process that anyone can join and they still manage to stay ahead of the OSS Javas. Open sourcing Java would make it easier for the OSS Javas to be able to release a compatible version within a reasonable time. How does that benefit Sun or the Java community? Also if Sun's java is OSed, what is going to happen to those free javas?
Linux Distro's could customize their JVM's to perform better on their distros and make money on it. If any Linux distributor really thought they could make a killing shipping a finely tuned Java/Linux platform why shouldn't they have to pay for it? There is a market for that and the distro's that have paid for the source licensing to do that have been quite successful.
Who does that leave? The distro's that want to make money shipping cd's like Debian. Sun does have 'scholorship' type programs for non profit entities to get great deals on licensing.
I'm all for Sun loosening their distribution licensing at no cost. I'd love to see Debian have a taskel option for J2EE server that automatically installs and configures tomcat/java/apache right out of the box. That would help Sun and Java. Open Sourcing it just helps the people that don't want to pay for it.
And how would that have been any different for you if Java was open source?
That's the problem (someone will get this I hope) :)
Open source java. No big incentives. Open source the whole WebShpere suite. Now you're talking about making a big difference.
I don't think you seem to know where java is and what it is.
Is that Sun's problem or the Distro's problem?
Someone who doesn't know enough to install the JDK on their computer on their own from a package that is already included in their distro (just not in the 'free' section) probably wouldn't be able to develop in it. If you like java, you can install it, you can use it.
Maybe the linux distributors should be a little more open regarding what programs they would like to include.
Look at sourceforge. The number of open source projects written with java is huge.
It's not sun that's going to lose out by not open sourcing java. I'm not trying to sound negative. People are deploying java apps on linux all the time. Especially web applications.
It seems like the OS community wants sun to do it out of principle. None of the arguments made really hold up in my opinion.
"There simply has not been any study of the quantity of 'bad' patents versus 'good' patents."
Ok.... so what does that have to do with discussions about bad patents? " Given all the discussions about how so many bad patents are being granted, "
There has also been a surge in the number of patents. If next year we had 30 times more movies made than last year, would you think someone inven ted some magical pill that awakens our deep cinemagraphic abilities?
If that's the case, all the more reason to respect Echostar and Charlie.
They talked about the fact that they were doing this because they didn't want to get bullied because they thought what Viacom was doing was illegal and unfair. If they really are going to reimburse about as much as Viacom was seeking, it's like telling Viacom... "Screw you, it's not about the money, you're a bunch of asses, now we're taking that money and giving it to our customers!" Or close to that :)
We need more companies that stand up to other companies like this (not like walmart).
I doubt I'd find it if I tried but I remember reading an article about a year or more ago from a big porn site operator taking about the advantages of using J2EE technologies in their high traffic sites. There were also comments about companies using them to fine tune their frameworks because of the real world load they had. I found this article when I wanted to find out more about competing technologies. I specifically wanted to find what the porn industry was using for their websites knowing how much traffic they get. So I stuck with jsp/servlet programming. If it's good enough for half naked women with fake boobs, it's good enough for me!
Unfortunately, people might not go to well for the slogan "Java & J2EE, we help you get sticky."
Porn has helped innovate many industries. It's a shame there's too much of a stigma associated with it and they don't get the recognition they deserve.
You're right. It doesn't cut down on spam at all but it does provide mechanisms for identifying spammers by making it illegal for them to hide. When you can identify spammers it is easier to block them.
"If you believe differently, then you must also believe that I have the right to scream obscenities into your bedroom window with a bullhorn while you're sleeping. Because after all, if you try to stop me, you'd trampling on my right to 'frea speach'."
That's an absurd and overly simple exmple. To use the same anology... It's more like I have a bullhorn set up in a public space and let any one scream whatever they want but I prevent you from using it because I don't like what you say. You don't block any one else from using your mail servers to send you mail? Why spammers.
Don't get the wrong impression. I have to deal with at least 100-300 or more spam messages a day and I have no desire to see spammers be able to have free reign to do what they want. They do however make some valid arguments. It's not a simple matter of "spam is bad, lets block all spam" It is similar to the whole obsenity debate (what is pornography). A lot of the spam blocking will be done at the isp level. What's going to stop some isp from making deals with certain "email marketers" to allow their spam in and not others? ISP's main concern over spam is bandwidth and diskspace. If they can find a way to make money on that bandwidth and diskspace many would jump at it. Lets say we do find a way to get rid of spam... Do you think ISP costs will go down 40-80%?
"we're saying that they have to pay for it themselves.)"
Lets say someone runs across your website. You don't know who they are but they decide to email you. Are they paing for it? Someone reads a comment of yours on slashdot and emails you... do they pay for it as well? Why do spammers have to pay to email you?
When you make a law it has to stand up to the constitution. Just because you don't like something doesn't mean you can ignore the rights. It's not theft in many cases. It is theft when people use open rellays and steal other people's bandwith to send messages. CAN-SPAM does address some of those cases.
Personally, I think it's ok to fight fire with fire. I'd love to see someone write a worm that would go through their emails, identify spam, then track down where it came from. If it finds an open really it tries to let the user know that they are at risk of being exploited or have already been exploited by spammers with instructions on how to fix it. Using the same exploits the spammers use. Is this hypocritical of me? Maybe, but as long as nothing malicious is done and it helps people that don't know what's going on stop contributing to the problem without randombly trying ip addresses and instead searching through spam to find sources so as to reduce bandwidth, maybe it's not that bad. As spammers and others have shown, viral techniques are very effective. Someone just needs to create a good enough antibody. Maybe I'm dreaming though.
You said it yourself "CAN-SPAM makes it illegal to forge your reply-to address" which means you'll know who the email is coming from. Knowing who the email is coming from makes it easier to compile a list of known spammers and block them. It doesn't have to just be by email it can be by domain. Blacklist dns records get updated quite frequently if you use them. Set this up in your server side spam software like spam assasin and you don't have to do anything.
To quote Live: :)
"this is not a black and white world
to be alive i say the colors must swirl
and i believe that maybe today
we will all get to appreciate
the beauty of grey"
If you're going underground, you're breaking the law, which gives companies the legal right to issue supbeanas to track down who you are that way.
A lot of people complain about the CANSPAM act saying it makes it legal to send spam. I disagree. While it doesn't make all solicited spam illegal, it does define legal terms for which you can send spam. The reason people have been using these covert techniques to relay spam is because if they use what is now considered legal, they can easily be filtered by users/ISP's that choose to. It doesn't eliminate spam but it should help cut it down without trampling on free speach.
Damn! Where've you been? Those butterfly commercials much seem even weirder to you then.
Hey, wasn't there a Law & Order episode where someone wrote a virus did something similar? I believe it was for diabetics though.
Also lets not forget. These licenses for Linux are not licenses for Linux. They are licenses to use SCO's IP in binary form. "Sure we'll take that, we still need to support UnixWare". 6 months later "Oh, they're calling them Linux licenses now? Those bastards!"
Canopy didn't do this overtly as you claim. The terms of the settlement were covered by a strict NDA. Had CA not felt that Canopy had already violated the NDA, CA would not have come public with it.
Sadly, in many cases it is.
The fact that it was wrong apparently doesn't mean much. While EB broke they law, they didn't steal the actual items from her. Just because they're wrong doesn't mean that she won't have to go to court to fight it. Who knows. By that time, maybe they would have sold all her stuff. Why haven't the policed taken the property back? I would have thought they would have at least taken it as evidence. Maybe they don't need evidence since they have a confession.
The point is this. If they give people like this a hard time in getting their stolen property back, chances are some people might not bother going through the legal expense to get them back. If they just give the items back easily, they'll be expected to do so every time.
That's my point... this doesn't seem like this was a one time thing. They're acting as if they have to worry about a lot of similiar type incidents. I'm not saying what they're doing is excusable. I'm saying their actions indicate someone should look into this further and see if there were other such cases. Their actions lead me to believe there are.
Also, consider that just because someone does something wrong, doesn't mean they automatically have to make it up to the person that was wronged. The theif in this instance is going to be punished in some way. The punishment isn't really going to benefit the victim. Maybe he goes to jail, does community service or something. If the victim wants some sort of restitution they have to do so in civil court. Same thing with EB. Like when the SEC fines some company for screwing over investors. Do you think any of that money goes back to the investors in most cases? The company does something that screws investors and the SEC collects money for it. The SEC must look forward to companies breaking their regulations.
So, lets consider this. The thief knew he could take it to EB and not worry about it. What Florida should be concerned about is not only getting back this woman's property/compensating for illegaly sold property, but also looking into other similar cases. My bet is that either EB is concerned there might be many more, or already knows there are more based on their reaction in this case... why they're not doing the right thing.
Sounds like they didn't even want their customers to know they were their customers.
It is rumoured that Larry Ellison had a dream on monday night in which Darl McBride, dressed in a blue sequen tuxedo, was trying to put a pen in his hand. Ellison thought it was a weird dream until the following day when his assistant let him know the maid turned in what she thought to be important papers found under the bed. Turns out they were SCO Linux license contracts.
In an interview, Ellison's assistant commented on his reacation. "He had an odd look on his face. On the one had relieved that he was not having dreams of McBride holding his hand. On the other completely disgusted. 'It's bad enough he's attacking the linux community, does he have to mock the cruise line magicians as well by dressing like them?' he said", reported his assistant.
In a related story, the headquaters of the compay that runs Ellison's personal security exploded today. There were reports of a Mig fighter plane in the area.
P.S. Only a small fraction of the stuff I make up is really true.
Don't just look at the pictures on the page. Read what it says.
UnitedLinux was formed by Caldera, Conectiva, SUSE LINUX and Turbolinux to build a single, world-wide Linux standard that customers and partners could work with for world-class, enterprise deployment of Linux.
If you don't know the relationship between SCO and Caldera you've had your head in the sand in regards to this topic?
Who in their right mind would mark this insightful!?!?!?!?!
Still... "available in solaris express (the pre-release of Solaris 10). " implies that solaris express is the pre-release of Solaris 10, which it isn't. Solaris Express is the program by which you can get Solaris 10.
Every where I read about Solaris 10, they call it Solaris Express, except on Sun's site. I don't know if there's confusion because someone refered to Solaris 10 as Solaris X (roman numeral)
The RIAA is already being sued by one parent citing RICO statutes.