Well, QT is not properly supported and the desktop plattform is KDE, not Gnome 3.0. I don't use GTK#. Don't mislead. Windows.forms will be wine crap and therefore not be mature or stable.
Wasn't it announced last year that we can expect mono 1.0 at the end of the year? so when will it be released?
Ximian is known for its vapor-marketing. For me mono is just work in progress.
Patents are dangerous but they have to be fixed at the lawmaker. It would be very good to devote more time to fix the law rather that avoid trivial patents.
C# is a nice language.
Mono an ambitious project, however it lacks qt integration.
We don't x JVM, y.NET implementations. what we really need is a stable and working plattform.
I prefer Java anc C# over C and C++ because they are safer in the application space.
However a real success may be a proper Visual Basic replacement.
I also like Lazarus http://lazarus.freepascal.org
I don't want software that will be mature when it is obsolete.
As far as I know is Microsoft obliged not to enter the UNIX market due to earlier agreements. The downward spiral of SCo may affect Microsoft as well. When Sco's management would go to jail because of license fraud it will probably affect Microsoft managers too.
Scosource Gregory Blepp (hired from SuSe) was many times very close to break the injunctions on the German market. If SCO tried to sell licenses or spread FUD at CeBIT, Hanover the rapid response would be to report the offence to the police and let them put the managers in jail.
EP IPRED Vote 2004 The European Parliament is set to vote on the IPR Enforcement Directive. Some members are asking for our opinions and analysis. Current Status and Dates The Fourtou report on the Intellectual Property Rights Enforcement Directive passed today as the rapporteur wished. This means that the package proposed by Janelly Fourtou (and supported by the conservatives, socialists, liberals) after unofficial meetings with the Council working party and the Commission was adopted in it's entirety.
All amendments - those from Greens, GUE, Cappato group and EDD - were defeated. The majority in all the roll call votes was of the order 300-350 with Fourtou, 100-200 against. Among the opposing votes were some national groups of the large parties, e.g. french socialists, austrian conservatives.
The result means:
The directive is very unclear, greatly divergent national implementations are likely. In general the result will be harsher enforcement all kinds of "intellectual property rights" (the scope of this term being unclear). The directive has no effect on substantive law (i.e. on what is patentable or otherwise ownable) and provides no special means to enforce digital property titles in the context of modern peer-to-peer networks. Only 3 parts of the directive are limited to "commercial scale". This means that the provisions of Articles 7(1), 8 and 9 can potentially be used against consumers. In the US this kind of legislation has been used to target, amongst others, children and their parents for downloading music. Internet service providers can, depending on implementation, be attacked for "providing" the means to download content which is protected by copyright. Patents are included within the scope of the directive. This is of serious concern to all companies in the patent system and outside it (including software, generics etc), given that patent litigation is regularly fraught with legal insecurity. During the voting session, Neil MacCormick, scottish professor of law and MEP for Greens/EFA, raised the issue of family connections in relation to conflicts of interest. This is in the light of numerous recent articles highlighting Mrs Fourtou's husband being CEO of Vivendi Universal. EP president Pat Cox indicated that this would be raised in the Parliament Bureau.
The results of roll call votes have not yet been published; however, it is clear that most conservative, socialist and liberal delegations voted against all amendments and in support the Fourtou/Council package.
Final vote was 330 to 151 with 39 abstentions.
On the key amendments:
Am 77 (Art 2.1: Scope of the directive) 307 to 185, 7 abstentions Am 58 (Recital 13: Patents) 193 to 310 Am 59 (Recital 13a: Commercial Scale) 198 to 305 The vote where we got the most support was on the Greens amendment 59, to restrict all parts of the Directive to commercial scale.
James Heald, coordinator of FFII UK who had been leading FFII's work on this directive, summarises:
We were only just over 50 MEPs away from success.
It's not over. More than for almost any other directive, what this directive will actually mean will depend on how it is implemented, member state by member state.
It could allow surprise raids on teenagers in the middle of the night by private security firms on the flimsiest of evidence; -- or alternatively, such operations could be allowed only in the most exceptional conditions, only by official authorities, and only on the basis of the highest standards of evidence.
We tried to write the safeguards into the directive itself. We failed.
So over the next two years, we need to make absolutely sure that safeguards are written into every single one of the 25 different national implementations instead.
Voting Result on Amendment 59 Votes in Favor of Limitation to Commercial Counterfeiting EDD Abitbol, Andersen, Belder, Bernii, Blokland, Bonde, Booth, Butel, van Dam, Esclopi,
Policemen act according to the legal standards. Your article is a flamebait.
"The people who once sent other people to gulag and confiscated their "bourgeois property" will be the lawmakers in Strasbourg and Brussels. Along with the people who sent other people to "gaskammers" and confiscated their "Jewish property"."
Sounds a little bit paranoid. These are crimes of the past and the persons who did it are dead. Crimes against humanity in the past were a good lesson to change the system. Legal standards in Europe are known to be high.
However, the executive branch does not make the laws. It's the lack of lobbying and citizen's representation on the EU level.
Support organisations who are in the debate by donations, give them attantion, forward their news. It is a a power case. the Music industry lost a lot of money, so they invested into lobbying. Don't hate the lobby, be the lobby.
Thsi si not what the directive or the criticism is about. Read the the sites carefully.
The directive will be dangerous for persons or orga on a commercial scale that are infringing on intellectual property. Also for BONA FIDE infrigenment, infrigement that you are not aware of. Measures designed for combating criminal product privacy will also apply.
Low saxon (ISO: Nds) is not called low saxon by its speakers, they call it plattduutsch. There is even a own Wikipedia op platt. Plattduutsch is one of the European regional languages, however stuck in the middle of Dutch and German and dansk. In each of these states it is often regarded as a dialect. It is even spoken in parts of paraguay and the mennonite community as many mennonite culture groups were founded by Frisian and today most Frisians speak platt.
In Europe we don't see a real difference, I like the FLOSS term.
Stallman is a bad diplomat. neither the FSF or OSI do have a mandate from the community. they cannot represent someone, they can only express their opinion. They use different approaches.
But I don't think we shall focus on this as a ideology issue.
In Europe there are several other groups, with different arguments and different background. But they don't dicuss their differences. We you have a group of priests that promote Linux use in Churches it's communication will be totally different from a high skilled, political hacker group that is afraid of DRM and so on. And a state funded flOSS competence center will talk different than a strong left-wing anti-globalisation critic group in favour of Linux.
I doubt there was a OSI FSF struggle -- there would be others as well. I don't think it is a good approach of the OSI to deny a public opinion about software patents.
It is also a question of power demonstration. Show that you are a force in policy and the lawmaker will be on your side. Its not easy to stop a running train but on the long run we can make a difference.
- next WIPo round - WTO representation - World Summit on the Information Society in Tunis.
Countersue, not possible in Germany as SCO does not sell their licenses in Germany
Probably not. But we can report the offense to the police in the Netherlands, in Belgium and so on. Everywhere Sco is on the market. All we need is a written case, a copy of their license and perhaps IBM can assist us to draft a small paper for the state attorney.
We can also call offices for consumer protection to care about the case for us.
To me SCO's license policy looks like fraud, its PR policy like financial fraud. Let's report the offence to the police.
It's time for a structural change in the US legal system, competition law has tpo be strengthened. A baseless dirty media campaign like SCo's would be impossible on the European market. However the EU legislator prepares a IPR Enforcement directive that may give power to failed companies that "pull a SCO". Several law principles are weakened. I think the IPR Enforcement directive may infringe on German constitutional law.
I think the appropriate defence against SCO in Europa is to report the offence to the police.
Their license policy looks to me like fraud, their communication policy toward the capital market like financial fraud. The managers will have to be held responsible. The US american market place is harmed very much by this failure of US competition law. According to German legal standards it would be impossible to act like they did on our market. Daimler-Chrysler, being a German-Us company will knock SCO down by their lawyers and probably be able to call for changes in the US legal system.
After all they did I want to see SCO's management in prison. Intellectual property is a WMD for failed companies. I hope the European legislators will be able to stop the IPR enforcement directve, a demontage of Rechtsstaat principles in order to avoid that compynies "pull a SCO" here.
/*The second issue is that "free speech" is very much an American idea. That's not to say that freedom is unknown in Europe, but Europe is far more willing to restrict speech that would (generally) be considered protected in the U.S. Germany, especially, is far more willing to subjugate free speech to social order, as a result of seeing the particular zeal with which certain very bad ideas were formerly so lovingly embraced by German listeners.*/
Well, I always was in favour of free speech on the internet, and my impressione is that the difference are not USA-Europe but internet-literat and non-Internet literat.
there was a funny event these days in theb federal state of Brandeburg where at the website of the federal state a link to a child(?) pornographic site was postet. It now was debated in politics and a real issue was created out of it. The most funny thing was obviously the language used. A unknown person "installed a link to a website" ecc. and the software was modified to make this impossible. Politicians are the riddiculous class when it comes to IT policy. But don't hate the politicians, get involved.
In a democracy it all depends on what the people feel is the most pressing issue. Don't be so proud of the USA, many friends of mine from school spent a year in the state and reported many anti-liberal regulations, such as drinking beer in the public. A female friend of mine was almost demissed from an US school because she coloured her hair in henna, and others were threathenes by the intellectual deficits of christian religious fundamentalism and had to face the externalities as they had to deal with such blinded christian sheeps.
And what about the DMCA? Is this best practise for Free Speech?
Real intellectual freedom requieres free speech, but free speech is only an instrument to free your mind. Higher Education, deep thought, meditations are other ways. Rejections of state interference and the the unwill to control other people are basic requirements.
Re:Germany has a sense of humor
on
Germany Muzzles SCO
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Well, there is a difference between free speech of individuals and corporate PR/financial market information(here:fraud). When you lie in the public and spread rumors and false evidence you cannot say: Well, that's my personal opinion.
SCO is infringing on certain business standards of communication policy. In germany this is seen as an anti-competitive offence and I believe the rule is good as we see it works while in the US further rumor and misinformation is spread and reported by the press.
That's war! I don't understand why you dig in the events of My Lai? Because they knew it was wrong?
It was good old murder. But when you drop a bomb you don't view your "civilian casualties". This cleans the same old dirty business.
10 000 killed Iraqis so far because of a US premptive strike? Well, you have to pay a price for freedom. I opposed the war, because they didn't present a case and we saw the strong bias in the US media and Government,.
War means killing civilians, and it onnly becomes a war crime when it is intentional.
The US perform very well in increasing the efficiency of warfare.
I believe the Iraqi war was not justified, but that's my European view. The main anger in Europe was the anti-liberal attitude of the US Goverment against its European allies. They made a for against the US out of a strategic decision based and didn't present a real case.
Military is an instrument of the government. I don't understand why it is important for US citizens to "support the army". Soldiers are no subjects, they are objects of government policy.
What you have to add is that the holocaust was a secret mission and (cynical) a gigantic waste of ressources needed for warfare. Perhaps that was the reason why the allied forces never dropped a bomb on ausschwitz train station.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, QT is not properly supported and the desktop plattform is KDE, not Gnome 3.0. I don't use GTK#. Don't mislead. Windows.forms will be wine crap and therefore not be mature or stable.
Wasn't it announced last year that we can expect mono 1.0 at the end of the year? so when will it be released?
Ximian is known for its vapor-marketing. For me mono is just work in progress.
"Of particular note was an installation in Munich, Germany, supporting 350 servers and 150,000 users."
Sorry, Miguel, they will install SuSe but nobody uses Gnome on the Desktop...
Patents are dangerous but they have to be fixed at the lawmaker. It would be very good to devote more time to fix the law rather that avoid trivial patents.
.NET implementations. what we really need is a stable and working plattform.
C# is a nice language.
Mono an ambitious project, however it lacks qt integration.
We don't x JVM, y
I prefer Java anc C# over C and C++ because they are safer in the application space.
However a real success may be a proper Visual Basic replacement.
I also like Lazarus
http://lazarus.freepascal.org
I don't want software that will be mature when it is obsolete.
As far as I know is Microsoft obliged not to enter the UNIX market due to earlier agreements. The downward spiral of SCo may affect Microsoft as well. When Sco's management would go to jail because of license fraud it will probably affect Microsoft managers too.
Scosource Gregory Blepp (hired from SuSe) was many times very close to break the injunctions on the German market. If SCO tried to sell licenses or spread FUD at CeBIT, Hanover the rapid response would be to report the offence to the police and let them put the managers in jail.
Get informed!
EP IPRED Vote 2004
The European Parliament is set to vote on the IPR Enforcement Directive. Some members are asking for our opinions and analysis.
Current Status and Dates
The Fourtou report on the Intellectual Property Rights Enforcement Directive passed today as the rapporteur wished. This means that the package proposed by Janelly Fourtou (and supported by the conservatives, socialists, liberals) after unofficial meetings with the Council working party and the Commission was adopted in it's entirety.
All amendments - those from Greens, GUE, Cappato group and EDD - were defeated. The majority in all the roll call votes was of the order 300-350 with Fourtou, 100-200 against. Among the opposing votes were some national groups of the large parties, e.g. french socialists, austrian conservatives.
The result means:
The directive is very unclear, greatly divergent national implementations are likely. In general the result will be harsher enforcement all kinds of "intellectual property rights" (the scope of this term being unclear). The directive has no effect on substantive law (i.e. on what is patentable or otherwise ownable) and provides no special means to enforce digital property titles in the context of modern peer-to-peer networks.
Only 3 parts of the directive are limited to "commercial scale". This means that the provisions of Articles 7(1), 8 and 9 can potentially be used against consumers. In the US this kind of legislation has been used to target, amongst others, children and their parents for downloading music.
Internet service providers can, depending on implementation, be attacked for "providing" the means to download content which is protected by copyright.
Patents are included within the scope of the directive. This is of serious concern to all companies in the patent system and outside it (including software, generics etc), given that patent litigation is regularly fraught with legal insecurity.
During the voting session, Neil MacCormick, scottish professor of law and MEP for Greens/EFA, raised the issue of family connections in relation to conflicts of interest. This is in the light of numerous recent articles highlighting Mrs Fourtou's husband being CEO of Vivendi Universal. EP president Pat Cox indicated that this would be raised in the Parliament Bureau.
The results of roll call votes have not yet been published; however, it is clear that most conservative, socialist and liberal delegations voted against all amendments and in support the Fourtou/Council package.
Final vote was 330 to 151 with 39 abstentions.
On the key amendments:
Am 77 (Art 2.1: Scope of the directive)
307 to 185, 7 abstentions
Am 58 (Recital 13: Patents)
193 to 310
Am 59 (Recital 13a: Commercial Scale)
198 to 305
The vote where we got the most support was on the Greens amendment 59, to restrict all parts of the Directive to commercial scale.
James Heald, coordinator of FFII UK who had been leading FFII's work on this directive, summarises:
We were only just over 50 MEPs away from success.
It's not over. More than for almost any other directive, what this directive will actually mean will depend on how it is implemented, member state by member state.
It could allow surprise raids on teenagers in the middle of the night by private security firms on the flimsiest of evidence; -- or alternatively, such operations could be allowed only in the most exceptional conditions, only by official authorities, and only on the basis of the highest standards of evidence.
We tried to write the safeguards into the directive itself. We failed.
So over the next two years, we need to make absolutely sure that safeguards are written into every single one of the 25 different national implementations instead.
Voting Result on Amendment 59
Votes in Favor of Limitation to Commercial Counterfeiting
EDD
Abitbol, Andersen, Belder, Bernii, Blokland, Bonde, Booth, Butel, van Dam, Esclopi,
Policemen act according to the legal standards. Your article is a flamebait.
"The people who once sent other people to gulag and confiscated their "bourgeois property" will be the lawmakers in Strasbourg and Brussels. Along with the people who sent other people to "gaskammers" and confiscated their "Jewish property"."
Sounds a little bit paranoid. These are crimes of the past and the persons who did it are dead. Crimes against humanity in the past were a good lesson to change the system. Legal standards in Europe are known to be high.
However, the executive branch does not make the laws. It's the lack of lobbying and citizen's representation on the EU level.
Support organisations who are in the debate by donations, give them attantion, forward their news. It is a a power case. the Music industry lost a lot of money, so they invested into lobbying. Don't hate the lobby, be the lobby.
Thsi si not what the directive or the criticism is about. Read the the sites carefully.
The directive will be dangerous for persons or orga on a commercial scale that are infringing on intellectual property. Also for BONA FIDE infrigenment, infrigement that you are not aware of. Measures designed for combating criminal product privacy will also apply.
And the directive reduces the legal standards.
A free Gun for SCO and Patent privateers.
Low saxon (ISO: Nds) is not called low saxon by its speakers, they call it plattduutsch. There is even a own Wikipedia op platt. Plattduutsch is one of the European regional languages, however stuck in the middle of Dutch and German and dansk. In each of these states it is often regarded as a dialect. It is even spoken in parts of paraguay and the mennonite community as many mennonite culture groups were founded by Frisian and today most Frisians speak platt.
In Europe we don't see a real difference, I like the FLOSS term.
Stallman is a bad diplomat. neither the FSF or OSI do have a mandate from the community. they cannot represent someone, they can only express their opinion. They use different approaches.
But I don't think we shall focus on this as a ideology issue.
In Europe there are several other groups, with different arguments and different background. But they don't dicuss their differences. We you have a group of priests that promote Linux use in Churches it's communication will be totally different from a high skilled, political hacker group that is afraid of DRM and so on. And a state funded flOSS competence center will talk different than a strong left-wing anti-globalisation critic group in favour of Linux.
I doubt there was a OSI FSF struggle -- there would be others as well. I don't think it is a good approach of the OSI to deny a public opinion about software patents.
It is also a question of power demonstration. Show that you are a force in policy and the lawmaker will be on your side. Its not easy to stop a running train but on the long run we can make a difference.
- next WIPo round
- WTO representation
- World Summit on the Information Society in Tunis.
Countersue, not possible in Germany as SCO does not sell their licenses in Germany
Probably not. But we can report the offense to the police in the Netherlands, in Belgium and so on. Everywhere Sco is on the market. All we need is a written case, a copy of their license and perhaps IBM can assist us to draft a small paper for the state attorney.
We can also call offices for consumer protection to care about the case for us.
There has to be action troughout Europe.
To me SCO's license policy looks like fraud, its PR policy like financial fraud. Let's report the offence to the police.
It's time for a structural change in the US legal system, competition law has tpo be strengthened. A baseless dirty media campaign like SCo's would be impossible on the European market. However the EU legislator prepares a IPR Enforcement directive that may give power to failed companies that "pull a SCO". Several law principles are weakened. I think the IPR Enforcement directive may infringe on German constitutional law.
I want to see SCO's management in prison.
I think the appropriate defence against SCO in Europa is to report the offence to the police. Their license policy looks to me like fraud, their communication policy toward the capital market like financial fraud. The managers will have to be held responsible. The US american market place is harmed very much by this failure of US competition law. According to German legal standards it would be impossible to act like they did on our market. Daimler-Chrysler, being a German-Us company will knock SCO down by their lawyers and probably be able to call for changes in the US legal system. After all they did I want to see SCO's management in prison. Intellectual property is a WMD for failed companies. I hope the European legislators will be able to stop the IPR enforcement directve, a demontage of Rechtsstaat principles in order to avoid that compynies "pull a SCO" here.
8. Put Sco's management into prison
They found Open Source on Mars
/*The second issue is that "free speech" is very much an American idea. That's not to say that freedom is unknown in Europe, but Europe is far more willing to restrict speech that would (generally) be considered protected in the U.S. Germany, especially, is far more willing to subjugate free speech to social order, as a result of seeing the particular zeal with which certain very bad ideas were formerly so lovingly embraced by German listeners.*/
Well, I always was in favour of free speech on the internet, and my impressione is that the difference are not USA-Europe but internet-literat and non-Internet literat.
there was a funny event these days in theb federal state of Brandeburg where at the website of the federal state a link to a child(?) pornographic site was postet. It now was debated in politics and a real issue was created out of it. The most funny thing was obviously the language used. A unknown person "installed a link to a website" ecc. and the software was modified to make this impossible. Politicians are the riddiculous class when it comes to IT policy. But don't hate the politicians, get involved.
In a democracy it all depends on what the people feel is the most pressing issue. Don't be so proud of the USA, many friends of mine from school spent a year in the state and reported many anti-liberal regulations, such as drinking beer in the public. A female friend of mine was almost demissed from an US school because she coloured her hair in henna, and others were threathenes by the intellectual deficits of christian religious fundamentalism and had to face the externalities as they had to deal with such blinded christian sheeps.
And what about the DMCA? Is this best practise for Free Speech?
Real intellectual freedom requieres free speech, but free speech is only an instrument to free your mind. Higher Education, deep thought, meditations are other ways. Rejections of state interference and the the unwill to control other people are basic requirements.
Well, there is a difference between free speech of individuals and corporate PR/financial market information(here:fraud). When you lie in the public and spread rumors and false evidence you cannot say: Well, that's my personal opinion.
SCO is infringing on certain business standards of communication policy. In germany this is seen as an anti-competitive offence and I believe the rule is good as we see it works while in the US further rumor and misinformation is spread and reported by the press.
That's war! I don't understand why you dig in the events of My Lai? Because they knew it was wrong?
It was good old murder. But when you drop a bomb you don't view your "civilian casualties".
This cleans the same old dirty business.
10 000 killed Iraqis so far because of a US premptive strike? Well, you have to pay a price for freedom. I opposed the war, because they didn't present a case and we saw the strong bias in the US media and Government,.
War means killing civilians, and it onnly becomes a war crime when it is intentional.
The US perform very well in increasing the efficiency of warfare.
Military power shall be used when it makes sense.
this is no pro or contra.
I believe the Iraqi war was not justified, but that's my European view. The main anger in Europe was the anti-liberal attitude of the US Goverment against its European allies. They made a for against the US out of a strategic decision based and didn't present a real case.
Military is an instrument of the government. I don't understand why it is important for US citizens to "support the army". Soldiers are no subjects, they are objects of government policy.
I don't quite understand why it is important to show or to deny that there was a Kerry - Fonda link. She is not Ussama BenLaden I guess.
What's the problem with her?
And how is this associated with the lost Vietnam war? I don't understand the issue.
First we have to get Europe's patent system under pressure then we can go for the US and wipe the lawyers out.
There is a lack of an US movement against software patents. But everybody in Europe shall better support AEL and FFII and the others.
http://wiki.ael.be
I remember the existence of shareware addons.
What you have to add is that the holocaust was a secret mission and (cynical) a gigantic waste of ressources needed for warfare. Perhaps that was the reason why the allied forces never dropped a bomb on ausschwitz train station.
Digital Rigths Management is eSlavery. The customer will lose rights to use his technology and hhackers will be punished.
This works with Eu Arlene McCarthy but not with the average PC user. DRM is a component of eSlavery.
I think it is very important to stop legislation designed to promote eSlavery
http://www.ipjustice.org