> Now, if you look at Java or C#, the runtime is a virtual processor and it keeps you from violating the > rules that an object defines on its data structure. The memory protection is *very* fine grained as it > is on the field level rather than on the page level. You cannot (repeat cannot) go modifying the internal > structures of objects if they are not marked as being accessible to you.
Oh, how blind you are.... most Java objects are serializable... so you could serialize the object and write it to a 'file' then manually manipulate the file and then bring it back...
Where there is a will, there will be a way.
ps. You could also write your own boot loader so that it 'removed' the class protection, and I would have to check if you could just pass any object to a native method which would allow you to muck with it that way as well.
I had the idea of a sliding scale depending upon what they want.
If they wanted to allow the code to be released under GPL then the cheapest rate
If They wanted to walk away with the code, then the highest rate.
Somewhere in between would be a middle rate with an annual maintainance fee to keep the GPL code non-releases... it would be released when the maintainance fee was dropped.
no!. GPL restricts your abilility to add restrictions... and restricting their ability to modify the code is certainly one of the resticted restrictions. So... the person wrapping the GPL source in DRM would be violating the GPL if they were required to give you the source under the GPL.
For every statement there is an opposite statement...
So if you are going to allow people to announce it's raining you should allow them to announce that it's not raining. If for the sake of argument you assume that WASP is the oppposite of LBGT (which isn't 100% correct but close enough, replace it with Hetersexuals, etc....)
The Opposite of "OZ [the name of her guild] is recruiting all levels ¦ We are not 'GLBT only,' but we are 'GLBT friendly'!" would be "OZ [the name of her guild] is recruiting all levels ¦ We are not 'WASP only,' but we are 'WASP frieldly'!"
So if you're going to allow the one, you need to allow the other....
This has been said before and it doesn't just affect the Linux Kernel...
If someone has released software under a previous version of the GNU Public license and they did NOT include the clause allowing relicencing under a later version of the GPL then you can NOT combine it with GPL version 3 code.
The suggestions were to contact the copyright owners and see if they will agree to re-licence the original code, or for you dual license YOUR code so that it could be used under either license.
Now, for the Linux Kernel, I was much more involved back in the 1991 time frame, don't recall any contributions that I would consider noteworthy, but in those days it was very common to see un-attributed patchs for various things. Don't know if you could track down all of the copyright owners from the very early days. Supposing (and I have no reason to suspect otherwise) that Linus knows (including then current contact infomation) who generated all of the initial contributions which were adopted into the main kernel. He (or someone) would need to track then all down (including the next of kin of any who have died) to get them to agree to a change of license. 1991 is 14 years ago... think of all the people you traded e-mails with even 10 years ago and...try tracking them down.
and Tvguide, and tourist guides, and news paper classified.... also... the card catalog in the libraries.... oh... let's start the book burnings now...
For a customer Support person the bar should be held a mastery of the company's "Customer Database systems" this would include trouble tickets (both customer's and systems), Billing Systems and Entitlement Systems as well as Service Offerings and Price lists and promotions. Though don't be surprised if you call on the first or second day that you hear about a new promotion and the Rep doesn't have any additional information, often support is the last to hear about new specials.
For Technical Support the bar should be held at general technical knowledge of all the products supported as well as how to find out who supports the various products and an indepth knowledge of the actual product that he/she supports and working knowledge of the related products that it may interact with. In particular they should understand of "Dependencies" of what relies on what to do it's job... that said for example in supporting Dial Up services they should understand that if a customer can't get e-mail but can access the web that there is no reason to check the modem and phone line, etc... The dependencies is a big thing, without understanding them you're shooting in the dark.
Technical Support are also expected to have manners but are usually (not always) forgiven if they don't know how to check contracts or billing, etc...
Are you trying to measure technical Support or Customer support and what field.
The differences are huge and you can't really compare them. Would you rather a Customer support person give you the warm fuzzies and support you with regards to status and account/billing stuff? Or would you prefer someone who asks you tough questions and makes you decide things possibly without fully explaining the choices.
I have been doing customer and technical support and for more years than I can count sometimes, and I will tell you that the greatest factor that will influence your experience is you.
Don't be the customer that didn't have a support contract and didn't spend 15 minutes researching his problem who then complained that they shouldn't have been charged the 2 hour minimum when the support person refered them to the document they needed in 10 minutes.
Don't be the customer that calls up about a problem with XXXX when XXXX isn't even in the same location and/or the problem no longer exists. And if you do call up in those cases, expect that you will have to call back when you have access to XXXX or when the problem happens again (though in both cases you may/should be able to get a list of general first steps, just be polite)
Don't be the customer that 'knows' what the problem is and just wants the Tech to confirm it, and if you really knew what the problem was then you would have already fixed it. (exceptions can be made for getting access to parts, etc...but expect that the Tech has just had to deal with 10 people who told him what the problem was and 11 of them where wrong (one of them had 2 ideas for the problem.) Work with the tech and if you disagree with a step ask why it's required and quietly state why you don't think it is needed and then LISTEN... the step may be routine or maybe required, maybe the tech didn't know that you had already tried it, etc... but don't yell or call names and always be polite.)
In the vast majority of companies the Technical or Customer support rep is the customer advocate, work with him/her and you will go much farther than if you fight them. They can help you walk the mazes and if they are on your side they can make you aware of options you would never have known about otherwise.
The next biggest factor after how the customer acts is the current priority of the company and the freedom/discretion they give their reps. If the rep can't refund you anything without a manager's sign off then the rep will need to go to his manager to get you a refund, if the manager needs to get approval for a refund over XX then you won't get over XX without the manager getting approval. Sounds obvious but remember this when you ask the rep for a refund, suggest that you can wait if he needs to check with someone and don't be afraid to ask to speak to someone who can authorize the refund.
Don't burn your bridges, but don't roll over either.
Ask your boss what's the difference between 2 weeks and 4 weeks or 6 weeks? What are their plans? If they are planning on hiring someone to replace you, ask to be part of the hiring process.
If they aren't planning on replacing you, then why waste your time. If they don't want you to be part of the hiring process then either they aren't planning on replacing you, or they are planning on waiting till you're gone to start looking... in either case.... walk away.
If they agree to let you be part of the hiring process, then review *with yourself* a list of all your job functions (good time to make notes, etc... ) and try to decide how long it would take to go over everything with someone at your skill level. *image you were just walking in*
Once you start talking to the replacement candidates you will have a much better idea of what would be required for a smooth transition.
2 weeks is a little tight to go though the hiring process but 4 weeks should be fine.
You don't want to be on call unless you are planning on continuing to collect a pay check from them, but you may want to leave your replacement your number if he has any questions
At some point in this process you should feel comfortable leaving. Of course it's all complicated if you have already accepted a new position and start date, if you haven't then you can generally hint that they may want to replace you before you leave... and then follow the above.
My general feeling is that somehow this employee violated their contact with the employer by using the GPL code. By agreeing all code you write belongs to someone else and then writing code that legally cannot belong to them you are somehow breaching the contract with the employer. i.e: if the company owns everything you think then you aren't permitted to work on open source projects. So the issue of who owns the code you did write for those projects is very confusing since it shouldn't have been written.
Actually, I have thought about it and decided that if I was working for a company that wanted to lay claim to anything I created even if it wasn't while I worked for them or related to by job, etc... I would base it on a GPL code base for just the cloudling effect.
Notice that I didn't say working on it during company time and using it at work, ie...not related to what they company pays me for.
It would do two things
1) It would lessen the value to the company so there would be less chance of them laying claim to it in the first place.
2) If they did lay claim to it, it would be encumbered in such a way that if they ever released it I would have legal recourse to my source code again.
If he introduced the code to his company, then said "oh yeah, by the way, this is GPL", then he really is liable.
Depend... if the introduction and the disclaimer are closely linked events then he would be free from liability because there was not entrapment they could have gotten rid of it before they did anything with it.
However, if they two events were separated by a long time as in he introduced the code as unencombered and then when they had relied upon it announced that it really was encmbered then you are correct.
We don't know if either of the two are correct, cause it seems like he was told he could work on his pet project without worried and if it was his pet project then he didn't have any expectations that the encomberence of the code would be an issue. So as long as he made them aware of the encomerence of the code as soon as he was aware of the implications he should be free and clear. They would have to prove that He know that they would lie to him and lay claim to his pet project and that he hid the encombance of the code in order to trap his company.
consideration is required for contract not license...
Everything is copyrighted with few exceptions...
They only way they can accept the code without the GPL is by putting it on a shelf and waiting a few hundred years... assuming they don't extend copyrights again.
If they want to copy (needed for distribution) they need permission from ALL of the copyright owners... which include ALL the previous authors who's contributions remain in the code. The previous authors have given their permission via the GPL license, which is just like any other license in that you only get the rights if you play by the rules....
The GPL allow for use by following the GPL rules... so unless they accept the GPL they are going to be hunted down by the RIAA and MPAA (well, they would be if they code was music or a movie)
I think he would want to cover his butt by officially notifing his company of the original source of the code so that if IBM later goes after the company they can't say that they didn't know and are innocent abusers and have them point IBM at the poor soul who they are now stealing the code from.
It's the copyrights of the Original Authors that are getting abused... they are the ones who have a legal claim for damages and the right to request that all of their original code be removed.... and the company has the right to recode all the original code and then re-release the product as they see fit (assuming that the contract if valid and the modifing author doesn't have any claim)
The Code is GPL (unless someone removes ALL of the original code) and as such can ONLY be release under the GPL.
If the company's contract with the programmer is valid then they OWN the code but they suffer the same restrictions on how they can use the code.
They could however claim that the modifier (who they 'own' by contract) doesn't have the right to release the code, and hence restrict the distribution of the modified code and any other code which was based upon it (UGLY, but check the GPL... you can't release code under the GPL that you don't own..and the GPL has clause to deal with accidential release )
The GPL doesn't cover patents at all, so the company could apply for a patent even if they original/unmodified version has the functionality...they shouldn't get it in that case but it wouldn't violate the GPL.
Lastly...if the original GPL code is completely scrubbed away..the company could release the resulting (no longer derivative code) under any license they choose.
Also, don't assume that just because you're citizen and are coming back, your wife can come back. If you married her overseas, she has no more legal right to enter the US than any other alien
Technically you are correct, however... being already married means she would get prefered processing (same rules - just faster)
If they have been married more than 2 years then her first greencard would be good for 10 years and not the pesky 2 years with the need to remove the conditional status after 2 years.
An additional bonus to already being married is they can (should/possibly need to) apply for her Greencard before she arrives here in the US. They can apply and be processed at the INS/BCS office within the Embasy/Consular office in Japan. She can have her Greencard before she ever sets foot in the US. (this is part of the reason why they get prefered processing - they are usually outside the US )
Since you're married... apply for her greencard before you get here... while still in Japan.
Then you can apply though the Embasy/Colsulate there rather than fighting the lines here in the US.
If you have been married more than 2 years, then the Greencard will be good for the next 10 Years and you won't need to worry about the INS/BCS for a while.
I doubt you could force the next owner to pay for the service and if the provider turned it off due to non-payment I think you would lose your claim... since it would be lost by the action outside your claim.
Though would be interesting to see if you could force the cable company to restore your cable after you had been pirating it for enough years.
Slashdot Mirror
> Now, if you look at Java or C#, the runtime is a virtual processor and it keeps you from violating the
> rules that an object defines on its data structure. The memory protection is *very* fine grained as it
> is on the field level rather than on the page level. You cannot (repeat cannot) go modifying the internal
> structures of objects if they are not marked as being accessible to you.
Oh, how blind you are.... most Java objects are serializable... so you could serialize the object and write it to a 'file' then manually manipulate the file and then bring it back...
Where there is a will, there will be a way.
ps. You could also write your own boot loader so that it 'removed' the class protection, and I would have to check if you could just pass any object to a native method which would allow you to muck with it that way as well.
I had the idea of a sliding scale depending upon what they want. If they wanted to allow the code to be released under GPL then the cheapest rate If They wanted to walk away with the code, then the highest rate. Somewhere in between would be a middle rate with an annual maintainance fee to keep the GPL code non-releases... it would be released when the maintainance fee was dropped.
no!. GPL restricts your abilility to add restrictions... and restricting their ability to modify the code is certainly one of the resticted restrictions. So... the person wrapping the GPL source in DRM would be violating the GPL if they were required to give you the source under the GPL.
For every statement there is an opposite statement...
So if you are going to allow people to announce it's raining you should allow them to announce that it's not raining. If for the sake of argument you assume that WASP is the oppposite of LBGT (which isn't 100% correct but close enough, replace it with Hetersexuals, etc....)
The Opposite of "OZ [the name of her guild] is recruiting all levels ¦ We are not 'GLBT only,' but we are 'GLBT friendly'!" would be "OZ [the name of her guild] is recruiting all levels ¦ We are not 'WASP only,' but we are 'WASP frieldly'!"
So if you're going to allow the one, you need to allow the other....
This has been said before and it doesn't just affect the Linux Kernel...
...try tracking them down.
If someone has released software under a previous version of the GNU Public license and they did NOT include the clause allowing relicencing under a later version of the GPL then you can NOT combine it with GPL version 3 code.
The suggestions were to contact the copyright owners and see if they will agree to re-licence the original code, or for you dual license YOUR code so that it could be used under either license.
Now, for the Linux Kernel, I was much more involved back in the 1991 time frame, don't recall any contributions that I would consider noteworthy, but in those days it was very common to see un-attributed patchs for various things. Don't know if you could track down all of the copyright owners from the very early days. Supposing (and I have no reason to suspect otherwise) that Linus knows (including then current contact infomation) who generated all of the initial contributions which were adopted into the main kernel. He (or someone) would need to track then all down (including the next of kin of any who have died) to get them to agree to a change of license. 1991 is 14 years ago... think of all the people you traded e-mails with even 10 years ago and
actually you can... the natting routers can do dial up... dialup on demand even :)
Funny thing is... they have license to include the kernel hacks... no matter how bad a job they did of it... not sure about the rest of the things...
follow the link and read the license...
I argue with telemarketers all the time... so what was your point?
I don't how ever arge with answering machines....
and Tvguide, and tourist guides, and news paper classified.... also... the card catalog in the libraries.... oh... let's start the book burnings now...
>
For a customer Support person the bar should be held a mastery of the company's "Customer Database systems" this would include trouble tickets (both customer's and systems), Billing Systems and Entitlement Systems as well as Service Offerings and Price lists and promotions. Though don't be surprised if you call on the first or second day that you hear about a new promotion and the Rep doesn't have any additional information, often support is the last to hear about new specials.
For Technical Support the bar should be held at general technical knowledge of all the products supported as well as how to find out who supports the various products and an indepth knowledge of the actual product that he/she supports and working knowledge of the related products that it may interact with. In particular they should understand of "Dependencies" of what relies on what to do it's job... that said for example in supporting Dial Up services they should understand that if a customer can't get e-mail but can access the web that there is no reason to check the modem and phone line, etc... The dependencies is a big thing, without understanding them you're shooting in the dark.
Technical Support are also expected to have manners but are usually (not always) forgiven if they don't know how to check contracts or billing, etc...
Are you trying to measure technical Support or Customer support and what field.
The differences are huge and you can't really compare them. Would you rather a Customer support person give you the warm fuzzies and support you with regards to status and account/billing stuff?
Or would you prefer someone who asks you tough questions and makes you decide things possibly without fully explaining the choices.
I have been doing customer and technical support and for more years than I can count sometimes, and I will tell you that the greatest factor that will influence your experience is you.
Don't be the customer that didn't have a support contract and didn't spend 15 minutes researching his problem who then complained that they shouldn't have been charged the 2 hour minimum when the support person refered them to the document they needed in 10 minutes.
Don't be the customer that calls up about a problem with XXXX when XXXX isn't even in the same location and/or the problem no longer exists. And if you do call up in those cases, expect that you will have to call back when you have access to XXXX or when the problem happens again (though in both cases you may/should be able to get a list of general first steps, just be polite)
Don't be the customer that 'knows' what the problem is and just wants the Tech to confirm it, and if you really knew what the problem was then you would have already fixed it. (exceptions can be made for getting access to parts, etc...but expect that the Tech has just had to deal with 10 people who told him what the problem was and 11 of them where wrong (one of them had 2 ideas for the problem.) Work with the tech and if you disagree with a step ask why it's required and quietly state why you don't think it is needed and then LISTEN... the step may be routine or maybe required, maybe the tech didn't know that you had already tried it, etc... but don't yell or call names and always be polite.)
In the vast majority of companies the Technical or Customer support rep is the customer advocate, work with him/her and you will go much farther than if you fight them. They can help you walk the mazes and if they are on your side they can make you aware of options you would never have known about otherwise.
The next biggest factor after how the customer acts is the current priority of the company and the freedom/discretion they give their reps. If the rep can't refund you anything without a manager's sign off then the rep will need to go to his manager to get you a refund, if the manager needs to get approval for a refund over XX then you won't get over XX without the manager getting approval. Sounds obvious but remember this when you ask the rep for a refund, suggest that you can wait if he needs to check with someone and don't be afraid to ask to speak to someone who can authorize the refund.
>
Ask your boss what's the difference between 2 weeks and 4 weeks or 6 weeks? What are their plans? If they are planning on hiring someone to replace you, ask to be part of the hiring process.
If they aren't planning on replacing you, then why waste your time. If they don't want you to be part of the hiring process then either they aren't planning on replacing you, or they are planning on waiting till you're gone to start looking... in either case.... walk away.
If they agree to let you be part of the hiring process, then review *with yourself* a list of all your job functions (good time to make notes, etc... ) and try to decide how long it would take to go over everything with someone at your skill level. *image you were just walking in*
Once you start talking to the replacement candidates you will have a much better idea of what would be required for a smooth transition.
2 weeks is a little tight to go though the hiring process but 4 weeks should be fine.
You don't want to be on call unless you are planning on continuing to collect a pay check from them, but you may want to leave your replacement your number if he has any questions
At some point in this process you should feel comfortable leaving. Of course it's all complicated if you have already accepted a new position and start date, if you haven't then you can generally hint that they may want to replace you before you leave... and then follow the above.
Notice that I didn't say working on it during company time and using it at work, ie...not related to what they company pays me for.
It would do two things
1) It would lessen the value to the company so there would be less chance of them laying claim to it in the first place.
2) If they did lay claim to it, it would be encumbered in such a way that if they ever released it I would have legal recourse to my source code again.
However, if they two events were separated by a long time as in he introduced the code as unencombered and then when they had relied upon it announced that it really was encmbered then you are correct.
We don't know if either of the two are correct, cause it seems like he was told he could work on his pet project without worried and if it was his pet project then he didn't have any expectations that the encomberence of the code would be an issue. So as long as he made them aware of the encomerence of the code as soon as he was aware of the implications he should be free and clear. They would have to prove that He know that they would lie to him and lay claim to his pet project and that he hid the encombance of the code in order to trap his company.
consideration is required for contract not license...
Everything is copyrighted with few exceptions...
They only way they can accept the code without the GPL is by putting it on a shelf and waiting a few hundred years... assuming they don't extend copyrights again.
If they want to copy (needed for distribution) they need permission from ALL of the copyright owners... which include ALL the previous authors who's contributions remain in the code. The previous authors have given their permission via the GPL license, which is just like any other license in that you only get the rights if you play by the rules....
The GPL allow for use by following the GPL rules... so unless they accept the GPL they are going to be hunted down by the RIAA and MPAA (well, they would be if they code was music or a movie)
I think he would want to cover his butt by officially notifing his company of the original source of the code so that if IBM later goes after the company they can't say that they didn't know and are innocent abusers and have them point IBM at the poor soul who they are now stealing the code from.
yes... but distribution/sharing is not required by mere modification
It's the copyrights of the Original Authors that are getting abused... they are the ones who have a legal claim for damages and the right to request that all of their original code be removed.... and the company has the right to recode all the original code and then re-release the product as they see fit (assuming that the contract if valid and the modifing author doesn't have any claim)
Wrong...
The Code is GPL (unless someone removes ALL of the original code) and as such can ONLY be release under the GPL.
If the company's contract with the programmer is valid then they OWN the code but they suffer the same restrictions on how they can use the code.
They could however claim that the modifier (who they 'own' by contract) doesn't have the right to release the code, and hence restrict the distribution of the modified code and any other code which was based upon it (UGLY, but check the GPL... you can't release code under the GPL that you don't own..and the GPL has clause to deal with accidential release )
The GPL doesn't cover patents at all, so the company could apply for a patent even if they original/unmodified version has the functionality...they shouldn't get it in that case but it wouldn't violate the GPL.
Lastly...if the original GPL code is completely scrubbed away..the company could release the resulting (no longer derivative code) under any license they choose.
The fiance visa is a silly idea if you are already married... there's a spouse visa ... just file for that
Big things if the visa and adjustment of status and possibly Greencard might all be processed in Japan since a Fiance Visa must be filed from the US.
Technically you are correct, however... being already married means she would get prefered processing (same rules - just faster)
If they have been married more than 2 years then her first greencard would be good for 10 years and not the pesky 2 years with the need to remove the conditional status after 2 years.
An additional bonus to already being married is they can (should/possibly need to) apply for her Greencard before she arrives here in the US. They can apply and be processed at the INS/BCS office within the Embasy/Consular office in Japan. She can have her Greencard before she ever sets foot in the US. (this is part of the reason why they get prefered processing - they are usually outside the US )
Wrong.....
Since you're married... apply for her greencard before you get here... while still in Japan.
Then you can apply though the Embasy/Colsulate there rather than fighting the lines here in the US.
If you have been married more than 2 years, then the Greencard will be good for the next 10 Years and you won't need to worry about the INS/BCS for a while.
no, 50% more is 1x + .5x = 1.5x
300% of the power = 200% more.... if you're adding you have to subtract out the original which is 100%.
I doubt you could force the next owner to pay for the service and if the provider turned it off due to non-payment I think you would lose your claim... since it would be lost by the action outside your claim.
Though would be interesting to see if you could force the cable company to restore your cable after you had been pirating it for enough years.