"We can't just open this up to the public. The minute we open it up we have in fact opened it up to the public and we can't restrict it in the future from a proprietary standpoint," said SCO CEO Darl McBride at conference in August this year.
The fact that I have seen your code does not make it part of the public domain. This is just silly.
Mac devotes love to take credit for the introduction of the graphical interface despite the facts of the matter. 1) Apple didn't invent it. & 2) If anybody should get credit for introducing it to the masses, it should be Bill Gates.
from the law? I know that this law is obnoxious, but what difference does it make that it is enforced against young girls and grandmas. It is just as obnoxious enforced against a 30 year old white male.
it is very possible that the potential cure for cancer will involve the use of viruses. Current research is allowing scientists to find out what proteins in our DNA are different in cancer cells and lead to a cancer cell's uncontrolled reproduction. Such proteins could be targeted by drugs, but also by viruses, which are able to change the DNA of cells they attack. It is unlikely that we will find naturally occurring viruses to attack all of the different types of cancer cells and artificial viruses will be vital to find the cure.
Obviously, caution is warranted, but caution is warranted in all scientific research.
what could they hope to obtain from the people they are subpoenaing. None of those entities have any access to information on this case that isn't public knowledge.
Each individual can file a motion to quash the subpoena which can also ask for sanctions against SCO for abuse of process.
by the beginning of ROTK.
I'm not sure that he has any role in the story at all until after the final battle with Sauron is already over.
I believe that the original poster overstated his importance to the plot.
Rule 11 requires that a plaintiff's attorney conduct a reasonable investigation before filing suit to ensure that the claim is not frivolous.
Once discovery is started, both sides have basically equal opportunities to ask for whatever they want.
You are correct that SCO should already have any evidence of infringement that they'll need. They could still discover evidence of willfullness, which would entitle them to punitive damages.
but what if this company was allowed to view SCO's evidence, they showed it to their lawyers, and then decided to make the investment.
However, I think it more likely that these companies are buying into the idea that SCO will be able to get a return on their ownership of the UNIX source code, even if not from the IBM case.
companies should not use software based on the GPL in their products because they'll have to publish it to the world and open it up for cloners. Ok, that makes sense.
The FSF is wrong for trying to enforce the GPL. Ok, that doesn't make sense.
They have to step back and see the big picture. These companies don't have to use the software. They didn't develop it, somebody else did, and that somebody else is willing to let them use it for free. They don't have any "right" to that software so they should quit bitching.
is a leveraged buyout. A company can buy back all of its outstanding stock. It is leveraged if they borrow money to do so. The board of directors (elected by the shareholders) makes this decision.
They cannot buy the stock back at any price they want. They have to buy it back at the fair market price. This is also not available simply to a major share holder, the board has to do it.
A tender offer is when some person or group offers to buy stock at a certain premium price as long as they can get a certain percentage of it. Thus, a certain percentage of shareholders have to agree to it.
inovation is a joke. Nobody buys that.
I'd like to see him explain exactly why Verisign should own the rights to the "bad domain" page. Obviously he can't, thus the "inovation" argument. If he could explain how the user gets the slightest bit of value out of this, I'll eat my underwear.
I mean come on, doesn't the Constitution guarantee every American the right be heard...over the phone?
Also, whose free speech is being trampled if they can't put those messages on my answering machine anymore.
Although the link appears dead already...
on
SCO's Plan Examined
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
it is hard for me to believe that anyone would have bought into the idea that the case would already be settled. There is no real incentive to settle until a trial date has been set and discovery has started.
Even if SCO's claims were rock solid, IBM would force them to spend gobs of money in prolonged discovery before they even thought about trying to settle.
reciprocal recognition of judgments treaty with the United States. However, that doesn't mean that their courts have to recognize a judgment that goes against their public policy.
It also doesn't keep them from getting a default judgment against you or waiting until you reenter the country to try to serve you with process.
I think this guy has an inferiority complex....
on
Memory Activity LEDs
·
· Score: -1, Offtopic
Europeans have to pay to go to a public restroom and people over six feet tall can't go down an average stairwell.
it has been discussed on this forum over and over and over again. Nearly everybody here agrees that we need reform. It is harder to say what actually needs to be done.
Personally, I feel like a lot would be accomplished by including some trademark-like rules. A company has to protect its trademarks or it loses it. I'm not suggesting that companies protect their patents, that is what they are doing by suing. What I'm suggesting is making inventors take steps to actually implement and develop their idea beyond a mere patent if they want to enforce it. They should have to actually try to find some commercial use for it other than litigation if they want to enforce it.
what makes them think that the combination cell phone/game machine is what people will want? I think that there are two seperate markets that they are failing to recognize. Are they trying to sell it as a cell phone that plays good games or a game machine that is also a cell phone. If it is the latter, then it is doomed to failure real gamers are going to be more concerned about functionality as a game playing machine only. In that regard, it doesn't appear to be ready to compete with the new backlit, rechargeable battery gameboy advances.
If I remember the story correctly, many Caldera and presumably now SCO employees have been contributors to linux.
If we take this to the extreme, does this mean that Damage wouldn't hire SCO's old janior?
there are plenty of legitimate reasons for not hiring former employees of a particular company.
Discrimination claims generally require that you discriminate against a protected class such as minorities or women. There are different levels and at the bottom, nearly any reasonable justification suffices.
having a legitimate use doesn't really have any legal effect. File sharing programs already have many possible legitimate uses. They have already quit trying to outlaw the file sharing software.
Guns have legitimate uses, however if I use it to kill somebody that doesn't limit my culpability.
of this database will be as a tool to trace the roots of all the code that is introduced into linux. This could be very instrumental in the IBM v. SCO case. This project should be expanded to show as much as possible the what has been added or removed from each version and who added or removed it. It may be tedious, but it definitely needs to be done in an age where linux is seeking wider commercial use.
is it legal for SCO to demand licensing fees for code which they are unwilling to disclose?
Obviously, such a demand would be unenforceable in these circumstances. The question is does this behaviour rise to the level of tortious interference with contractual obligations?
Slashdot Mirror
"We can't just open this up to the public. The minute we open it up we have in fact opened it up to the public and we can't restrict it in the future from a proprietary standpoint," said SCO CEO Darl McBride at conference in August this year.
The fact that I have seen your code does not make it part of the public domain. This is just silly.
Mac devotes love to take credit for the introduction of the graphical interface despite the facts of the matter. 1) Apple didn't invent it. & 2) If anybody should get credit for introducing it to the masses, it should be Bill Gates.
from the law? I know that this law is obnoxious, but what difference does it make that it is enforced against young girls and grandmas. It is just as obnoxious enforced against a 30 year old white male.
I'm sure that what they want to do is license the technology to "legitimate" spammers, such as online retailers.
it is very possible that the potential cure for cancer will involve the use of viruses. Current research is allowing scientists to find out what proteins in our DNA are different in cancer cells and lead to a cancer cell's uncontrolled reproduction. Such proteins could be targeted by drugs, but also by viruses, which are able to change the DNA of cells they attack. It is unlikely that we will find naturally occurring viruses to attack all of the different types of cancer cells and artificial viruses will be vital to find the cure. Obviously, caution is warranted, but caution is warranted in all scientific research.
what could they hope to obtain from the people they are subpoenaing. None of those entities have any access to information on this case that isn't public knowledge. Each individual can file a motion to quash the subpoena which can also ask for sanctions against SCO for abuse of process.
by the beginning of ROTK. I'm not sure that he has any role in the story at all until after the final battle with Sauron is already over. I believe that the original poster overstated his importance to the plot.
Rule 11 requires that a plaintiff's attorney conduct a reasonable investigation before filing suit to ensure that the claim is not frivolous. Once discovery is started, both sides have basically equal opportunities to ask for whatever they want. You are correct that SCO should already have any evidence of infringement that they'll need. They could still discover evidence of willfullness, which would entitle them to punitive damages.
but what if this company was allowed to view SCO's evidence, they showed it to their lawyers, and then decided to make the investment. However, I think it more likely that these companies are buying into the idea that SCO will be able to get a return on their ownership of the UNIX source code, even if not from the IBM case.
That is true. They would be a cartel. If they get together to fix prices, it is still just as illegal.
companies should not use software based on the GPL in their products because they'll have to publish it to the world and open it up for cloners. Ok, that makes sense. The FSF is wrong for trying to enforce the GPL. Ok, that doesn't make sense. They have to step back and see the big picture. These companies don't have to use the software. They didn't develop it, somebody else did, and that somebody else is willing to let them use it for free. They don't have any "right" to that software so they should quit bitching.
is a leveraged buyout. A company can buy back all of its outstanding stock. It is leveraged if they borrow money to do so. The board of directors (elected by the shareholders) makes this decision. They cannot buy the stock back at any price they want. They have to buy it back at the fair market price. This is also not available simply to a major share holder, the board has to do it. A tender offer is when some person or group offers to buy stock at a certain premium price as long as they can get a certain percentage of it. Thus, a certain percentage of shareholders have to agree to it.
inovation is a joke. Nobody buys that. I'd like to see him explain exactly why Verisign should own the rights to the "bad domain" page. Obviously he can't, thus the "inovation" argument. If he could explain how the user gets the slightest bit of value out of this, I'll eat my underwear.
I mean come on, doesn't the Constitution guarantee every American the right be heard...over the phone? Also, whose free speech is being trampled if they can't put those messages on my answering machine anymore.
it is hard for me to believe that anyone would have bought into the idea that the case would already be settled. There is no real incentive to settle until a trial date has been set and discovery has started. Even if SCO's claims were rock solid, IBM would force them to spend gobs of money in prolonged discovery before they even thought about trying to settle.
reciprocal recognition of judgments treaty with the United States. However, that doesn't mean that their courts have to recognize a judgment that goes against their public policy. It also doesn't keep them from getting a default judgment against you or waiting until you reenter the country to try to serve you with process.
Europeans have to pay to go to a public restroom and people over six feet tall can't go down an average stairwell.
it has been discussed on this forum over and over and over again. Nearly everybody here agrees that we need reform. It is harder to say what actually needs to be done. Personally, I feel like a lot would be accomplished by including some trademark-like rules. A company has to protect its trademarks or it loses it. I'm not suggesting that companies protect their patents, that is what they are doing by suing. What I'm suggesting is making inventors take steps to actually implement and develop their idea beyond a mere patent if they want to enforce it. They should have to actually try to find some commercial use for it other than litigation if they want to enforce it.
what makes them think that the combination cell phone/game machine is what people will want? I think that there are two seperate markets that they are failing to recognize. Are they trying to sell it as a cell phone that plays good games or a game machine that is also a cell phone. If it is the latter, then it is doomed to failure real gamers are going to be more concerned about functionality as a game playing machine only. In that regard, it doesn't appear to be ready to compete with the new backlit, rechargeable battery gameboy advances.
If I remember the story correctly, many Caldera and presumably now SCO employees have been contributors to linux. If we take this to the extreme, does this mean that Damage wouldn't hire SCO's old janior?
there are plenty of legitimate reasons for not hiring former employees of a particular company. Discrimination claims generally require that you discriminate against a protected class such as minorities or women. There are different levels and at the bottom, nearly any reasonable justification suffices.
having a legitimate use doesn't really have any legal effect. File sharing programs already have many possible legitimate uses. They have already quit trying to outlaw the file sharing software. Guns have legitimate uses, however if I use it to kill somebody that doesn't limit my culpability.
of this database will be as a tool to trace the roots of all the code that is introduced into linux. This could be very instrumental in the IBM v. SCO case. This project should be expanded to show as much as possible the what has been added or removed from each version and who added or removed it. It may be tedious, but it definitely needs to be done in an age where linux is seeking wider commercial use.
is it legal for SCO to demand licensing fees for code which they are unwilling to disclose? Obviously, such a demand would be unenforceable in these circumstances. The question is does this behaviour rise to the level of tortious interference with contractual obligations?
but isn't the new moderation system leading to the first few good posts on any topic all getting modded up to 5 while the rest get ignored?