It's not in violation provided they let you have the sourcecode - which they do, conveniently for download next to the binaries. I don't see the issue here. If people want the sourcecode they can have it , in compliance with the GPL.
The issue is that they provide source for the last release, but the binary shareware version is different in several crucial ways.
The binary version includes bug fixes and new code, and there is no source version for this as required by the gpl.
He has changed the xchat licence from gpl to shareware. Zed, who is the guy in charge, seems to think that he can do this because he did the most important work for the win32 build and the new code (which was submitted to a gpl project) did not have a licence attached. This is patently wrong.
It seems that Zed has been informed of his GPL violations and pointed to the specific clauses in the GPL but is toughing it out. I think, either he does not/cannot to believe he's in the wrong or he doesn't care.
Given that Linux is getting higher security certifications than Windows is (now that we've got companies with enough money invested to make the process worthwhile)
Is there any evidence of this? Sounds like the kind of thing I would have read on slashdot.
>I do admit the "no logo clothing" regulation is a >bit weird.
There is a reasonable explanation for this. It seems that the companies, like nike, adidas, etc which are not official sponsors have attempted in previous years to "ambush" the events.
What this means is plastering the city with their billboards, changing their advertising to suggest a connection to the Olympics where there is none, or to pay large groups of people to wear their logos and attract attention to themselves in the stadium and therefore on the television screens.
This regulation is a nuisance to individual fans, but is part of a crucial strategy on the part of the organisers. Sponsors pay large amounts of money to become exclusive sponsors of the Olympic Games. These funds are crucial in funding the games, and ambush campaigns could mean a lot of lost revenue to the games.
DC Comics are owned by Warner Bros. As in Time AOL Warner, huge soulless megacorporation.
Warner owns the rights to the film adaptations of DC's characters and mostly treat them with utter disrespect. Internally I'm pretty sure DC are appalled by a lot of Warner's decisions but what can they do? Publicly complaining about their parent company won't do them any good at all.
The Catwoman film is nothing but a Halle Berry vehicle. They took the name, and threw away most everything else.
That would be episodes 6 and 7 which concentrate on the viewpoints of 1st Sergeant Lipton in one episode and on the combat medic (Eugene something) in the other.
To AC: Episode 4 is either Crossroads or Replacements and has no snow.
I suppose this is where I explain that the branch names in FreeBSD (and possibly the others also) are misleading.
There is only a single active CURRENT or STABLE branch at any time, but there are numerous RELEASE branches (one for each x.y version of FreeBSD)
CURRENT is the new technology branch which is considered bleeding edge similar to 2.5 or 2.7.
STABLE is also a development branch focused on making improvements but not on wholesale architectural changes to the system. Changes are intended to be more incremental, and less bleeding edge (eg backporting but not, say, ripping out the VM as happened in 2.4)
RELEASE branches are periodically created from a CURRENT/STABLE branch. Those created from STABLE are generally considered rock solid production releases, and only updated for bug and security fixes. Those created from CURRENT are reasonably stable snapshots of the development of the next major version. These could be likened to the early 2.4 releases where things were still changing (like replacing the VM)
It's not intuitive, but it's the way things are.
Of course, this isn't to say that the naming scheme you suggest doesn't make more sense. The FreeBSD scheme can be confusing and apparently can result in new users who refuse to believe that STABLE is not in fact a maintenance branch, even in the face of clear documentation.
What you say has merit. It is the independent code review by experts that will reveal the flaws.
However, if the software is not open source then someone must choose the independent experts. What if a decision was made to only allow access to a selection of these experts, denying access to certain others?
What if the body that chose independent reviewers has been compromised? Some of those chosen could be shills or incompetent. What if the expert who would have spotted a critical flaw was among those not selected to review the code?
In short, how do you guarantee that independent code review occurs without open source?
It isn't a coincidence that the main chacter serves in the "Royal Navy" and is fighting against an enemy that very strongly resembles France. Or that the title character's initials are HH.
...and the introduction of such characters as Rob S. Pierre (robespierre anyone?) in a bloody revolution.
There are strong similarities between the sagas of Hornblower and Harrington as well as between the Napoleonic Wars and Harringtons universe.
Harrington herself is a mixture of Nelson, Hornblower and Weber's own twist on the character, complete with space navy (Royal Navy), dastardly empire building opposition (France) and injuries parallel to those of Nelson (loss of eye and arm).
The latest in the main series has also opened the plot for a scandalous love affair with the consent of the other party's spouse (Nelson again)
Weber has indicated though that the plot will start to show more divergence from the events of the Napoleonic wars from this point on. Harrington (I think) will still probably die in her greatest hour destroying the enemy fleet when the series finally wraps up.
"If microsoft played it like this, then why didn't SCO agreed during the meeting, then payed the license fee straight to it's investors and never say another word about it ?
Because frankly, that's what I would have done in that position."...in this scenario, that would only guarantee survival for a short period. If faith is kept in the bargain then there would be the further possible payments to keep the company going for many years.
I stopped paying attention somewhere around the time that 3.0 was coming out, and turned out to be the bloatware edition (I remember the first wmp7, horrible, slow, buggy attempt at a home media center, the newer ones seem faster at least; Realplayer/jukebox, eurgh; musicmatch, eurgh. give me clean, fast and simple please) Anyway it was a long time before I tuned back in and discovered that they were developing both 2.x and 3.x. Is the company in decline? Who cares? I don't: and maybe that's just indicative of a company's declining fortunes.
While I agree with what you're saying, I think that the claim jgerman is actually making is not that the employee owned his own code (a different argument entirely) but that every employee has the right to do act as if he were an *agent* of the company, in which case (under UK law, and I suspect US law to be similar) a contract made in good faith is binding whether the rest of the company likes it or not.
Of course this is not true as, while employees may have the power to act as an agent, employee!=agent. It would be madness if every employee had the power to act unilaterally for a company - what would happen when the new employee fresh from school joined as a junior dogsbody/teaboy/cleaner and began GPL'ing your software? How could that possibly be considered a contractually binding action by the company? (unless of course that was his job/in his contract...)
With respect to Justins statement it seems that he believed himself to have a great deal more power over his work and Nullsoft until recently when AOL decided to redefine that power and claim he never had those powers in the first place and had been flaunting them for four years without AOL noticing. Of course this is utter bull, and has helped precipitate his resignation.
1 Obtain proof of dyslexic condition
2 Jump through hoops, fill in forms
3 Profit!!!
Here in the UK there's somewhere around 4000GBP in benefits to be had for dyslexic university students, in two or three lump sums over the course of the degree all for computer equipment.
Lemme see... 2000GBP at beginning of course will get you a top of the line PC/laptop with scanner, printer, LCD screen, DVDRW, and more.
Then towards the end of the course, repeat!!! Some of my friends have THE nicest setups as a result of this. Of course, you have to be dyslexic to get it.
Is it as much as 20%? I seem to recall that it was a much more reasonable figure of ~5%. Back when I was trying XP Pro out it did not like my hardware and wouldn't run stably (precipitating many reinstalls) and altering this setting was on a list as long as my arm of tweaks to apply.
Of course you first have to install portupgrade itself. Also despite the name it'll do ports, packages, upgrades, installs and of course (most importantly) will upgrade ports where make fails because the port you're upgrading is listed as a dependancy for other ports.
Slashdot Mirror
The issue is that they provide source for the last release, but the binary shareware version is different in several crucial ways.
It seems that Zed has been informed of his GPL violations and pointed to the specific clauses in the GPL but is toughing it out. I think, either he does not/cannot to believe he's in the wrong or he doesn't care.
Given that Linux is getting higher security certifications than Windows is (now that we've got companies with enough money invested to make the process worthwhile)
Is there any evidence of this? Sounds like the kind of thing I would have read on slashdot.
>I do admit the "no logo clothing" regulation is a >bit weird.
There is a reasonable explanation for this. It seems that the companies, like nike, adidas, etc which are not official sponsors have attempted in previous years to "ambush" the events.
What this means is plastering the city with their billboards, changing their advertising to suggest a connection to the Olympics where there is none, or to pay large groups of people to wear their logos and attract attention to themselves in the stadium and therefore on the television screens.
This regulation is a nuisance to individual fans, but is part of a crucial strategy on the part of the organisers. Sponsors pay large amounts of money to become exclusive sponsors of the Olympic Games. These funds are crucial in funding the games, and ambush campaigns could mean a lot of lost revenue to the games.
DC Comics are owned by Warner Bros. As in Time AOL Warner, huge soulless megacorporation.
Warner owns the rights to the film adaptations of DC's characters and mostly treat them with utter disrespect. Internally I'm pretty sure DC are appalled by a lot of Warner's decisions but what can they do? Publicly complaining about their parent company won't do them any good at all.
The Catwoman film is nothing but a Halle Berry vehicle. They took the name, and threw away most everything else.
That would be episodes 6 and 7 which concentrate on the viewpoints of 1st Sergeant Lipton in one episode and on the combat medic (Eugene something) in the other.
To AC: Episode 4 is either Crossroads or Replacements and has no snow.
I suppose this is where I explain that the branch names in FreeBSD (and possibly the others also) are misleading.
There is only a single active CURRENT or STABLE branch at any time, but there are numerous RELEASE branches (one for each x.y version of FreeBSD)
CURRENT is the new technology branch which is considered bleeding edge similar to 2.5 or 2.7.
STABLE is also a development branch focused on making improvements but not on wholesale architectural changes to the system. Changes are intended to be more incremental, and less bleeding edge (eg backporting but not, say, ripping out the VM as happened in 2.4)
RELEASE branches are periodically created from a CURRENT/STABLE branch. Those created from STABLE are generally considered rock solid production releases, and only updated for bug and security fixes. Those created from CURRENT are reasonably stable snapshots of the development of the next major version. These could be likened to the early 2.4 releases where things were still changing (like replacing the VM)
It's not intuitive, but it's the way things are.
Of course, this isn't to say that the naming scheme you suggest doesn't make more sense. The FreeBSD scheme can be confusing and apparently can result in new users who refuse to believe that STABLE is not in fact a maintenance branch, even in the face of clear documentation.
As a British Junior Invitational Mathematical Olympiad (Yes, really.) I must say, unequivocally, no.
What you say has merit. It is the independent code review by experts that will reveal the flaws.
However, if the software is not open source then someone must choose the independent experts. What if a decision was made to only allow access to a selection of these experts, denying access to certain others?
What if the body that chose independent reviewers has been compromised? Some of those chosen could be shills or incompetent. What if the expert who would have spotted a critical flaw was among those not selected to review the code?
In short, how do you guarantee that independent code review occurs without open source?
>Farmers under capitalism grow food to make a buck.
Farmers under capitalism grow food and make huge losses.
Farmers under capitalism with subsidies grow food and make a buck.
...by modifying the source code of course! :)
Because it's Horatio Hornblower in space.
It isn't a coincidence that the main chacter serves in the "Royal Navy" and is fighting against an enemy that very strongly resembles France. Or that the title character's initials are HH.
There are strong similarities between the sagas of Hornblower and Harrington as well as between the Napoleonic Wars and Harringtons universe.
Harrington herself is a mixture of Nelson, Hornblower and Weber's own twist on the character, complete with space navy (Royal Navy), dastardly empire building opposition (France) and injuries parallel to those of Nelson (loss of eye and arm).
The latest in the main series has also opened the plot for a scandalous love affair with the consent of the other party's spouse (Nelson again)
Weber has indicated though that the plot will start to show more divergence from the events of the Napoleonic wars from this point on. Harrington (I think) will still probably die in her greatest hour destroying the enemy fleet when the series finally wraps up.
He's a fairly well known blogger who works at Yahoo
Yes, the dependencies are fully listed in both directions (requires and required by)
"If microsoft played it like this, then why didn't SCO agreed during the meeting, then payed the license fee straight to it's investors and never say another word about it ? Because frankly, that's what I would have done in that position." ...in this scenario, that would only guarantee survival for a short period. If faith is kept in the bargain then there would be the further possible payments to keep the company going for many years.
See above, and ignore the bit after IANAL. It was needless and poorly thought out.
I stopped paying attention somewhere around the time that 3.0 was coming out, and turned out to be the bloatware edition (I remember the first wmp7, horrible, slow, buggy attempt at a home media center, the newer ones seem faster at least; Realplayer/jukebox, eurgh; musicmatch, eurgh. give me clean, fast and simple please) Anyway it was a long time before I tuned back in and discovered that they were developing both 2.x and 3.x. Is the company in decline? Who cares? I don't: and maybe that's just indicative of a company's declining fortunes.
Toby,
While I agree with what you're saying, I think that the claim jgerman is actually making is not that the employee owned his own code (a different argument entirely) but that every employee has the right to do act as if he were an *agent* of the company, in which case (under UK law, and I suspect US law to be similar) a contract made in good faith is binding whether the rest of the company likes it or not.
Of course this is not true as, while employees may have the power to act as an agent, employee!=agent. It would be madness if every employee had the power to act unilaterally for a company - what would happen when the new employee fresh from school joined as a junior dogsbody/teaboy/cleaner and began GPL'ing your software? How could that possibly be considered a contractually binding action by the company? (unless of course that was his job/in his contract...)
With respect to Justins statement it seems that he believed himself to have a great deal more power over his work and Nullsoft until recently when AOL decided to redefine that power and claim he never had those powers in the first place and had been flaunting them for four years without AOL noticing. Of course this is utter bull, and has helped precipitate his resignation.
IANAL (and jgerman you are being silly)1 Obtain proof of dyslexic condition 2 Jump through hoops, fill in forms 3 Profit!!! Here in the UK there's somewhere around 4000GBP in benefits to be had for dyslexic university students, in two or three lump sums over the course of the degree all for computer equipment. Lemme see... 2000GBP at beginning of course will get you a top of the line PC/laptop with scanner, printer, LCD screen, DVDRW, and more. Then towards the end of the course, repeat!!! Some of my friends have THE nicest setups as a result of this. Of course, you have to be dyslexic to get it.
...on the other hand it's easier to stay awake during the ah... less engaging lectures.
Is it as much as 20%? I seem to recall that it was a much more reasonable figure of ~5%. Back when I was trying XP Pro out it did not like my hardware and wouldn't run stably (precipitating many reinstalls) and altering this setting was on a list as long as my arm of tweaks to apply.
Of course you first have to install portupgrade itself. Also despite the name it'll do ports, packages, upgrades, installs and of course (most importantly) will upgrade ports where make fails because the port you're upgrading is listed as a dependancy for other ports.