That is a distinct possibility with the way Akamai is doing business, yes.
Can't say for sure that this happens, there may be subsequent checks in place.
But you are generally free to use any DNS servers you want, and most ISPs will serve DNS both ON and OFF their network. Having been saddled with an ISP with dodgey DNS servers I have often simply substituted IPs for a fast ISP in another state into my resolv.conf.
He committed fraud upon the customers, who thought they were getting the real thing.
Have you actually read TFA? (Of course not, what was I thinking!?!).
He was convicted of fraud. In a court of law. By a Judge and Lawyers that actually HAVE law degrees. Stop arguing about fraud. He pleaded guilty. He is guilty. That ship has sailed.
Quote TFA:
According to a statement of facts read during Bi’s plea hearing, agents executed a search warrant at Bi’s house and found multiple CD duplicators and more than 1,000 PRINTED counterfeit CDs.
He represented these as real, there is no evidence he showed sharpie disks. You made that up.
A few at major backbone hubs routing to your fastest least busy server is all you need.
Nobody would use anycast if it required a DNS server in EVERY ISP.
The point here is that routing a request to a server near the DNS server is fundamentally the wrong thing to do. You route to the server closest to the end user.
Governments multi-task - a concept that also seems strangely foreign to the geek.
Well said.
Why is it anything accomplished by government is always a waste of time and money just because something else (speakers pet project) is not accomplished first?
Its a hell of a lot easier and less expensive to take down a disk duplicator when the aggrieved copyright holder calls you up and tells you exactly where the disks are coming from and files an official complaint, than it is to invade yet another country to get Osama.
Who would want a government capable of solving all problems simultaneously and in the right sequence to satisfy every citizens priorities.
YOU have satisfied your obligation if you provide a means of to obtain it.
YOU do not have to run a web site. YOU do not have to physically hand the source code over on a CD. YOU can hire someone, or merely have an agreement with someone.
YOU have no idea what the hell YOU are talking about.
For most, simply coming into compliance is all they are ever asked to do in court.
Some busybox (etc) providers drag their heels on even that, but most simply hang it on their website in some obscure place and call it a day. Most of these devices are obsolete before anyone notices the missing source code.
Its not hard to comply, its just that Joe Purchasing Agent has no clue he is supposed to do so when he buys a cheesy tablet from an OEM and changes nothing but the label on the back.
So after all the drama we are agreed that there is no requirement to SHIP the source?
Wow. What a long way to go to get to that cleared up.
Samsung always makes source available. Not necessarily instantly, sometimes it takes a month or so.
ARCHOS always makes it available. Imagine that! Archos!?
The rest? Well without digging thru their documentation, web sites, and "about screens" I can't be sure there isn't a written notice somewhere, and have to take the authors word that he did an exhaustive search. I have no doubt some are ignorant of this requirement.
Some insist anything linked against the kernel libraries (making calls to the kernel) must be make source code available. But I do not believe this is the general consensus.
For that to work the company earning profits from Android must contribute to hosting the source code. If that don't do that the version of android used on the tablet might not be available when needed.
The GPL makes no requirements as to who hosts the source code.
Well the point of the GP's Anycast comment was that simply using 8.8.8.8 as your dns server is not sufficient to pinpoint WHERE your dns comes from.
8.8.8.8 will resolve to different physical machines depending on the load balancing that Google is doing.
Your dns request might be served out of California on one hit, and out of Ireland on the next hit.
Akamai, by paying attention to where the DNS request came from is doing it fundamentally WRONG, because they could actually deny service (for national licensing reasons) based on location of the DNS server when the actual user was in a totally different (and legal) location.
Making available does not require shipping, nor does it include hosting your own servers. You need merely "make it available". There are no specific requirements as to where it must be a available, and having the Open Handset Alliance perform this service is sufficient.
Samsung and some others are quite responsive in getting the source out there. Others not so much.
My only point in my post above is there is no requirement that the source be "shipped". It merely needs to be available along with any modifications a manufacturer makes to it.
Slashdot Mirror
That is a distinct possibility with the way Akamai is doing business, yes.
Can't say for sure that this happens, there may be subsequent checks in place.
But you are generally free to use any DNS servers you want, and most ISPs will serve DNS both ON and OFF their network. Having been saddled with an ISP with dodgey DNS servers I have often simply substituted IPs for a fast ISP in another state into my resolv.conf.
Look, if Google can use anycast, why do you find it such a stretch that Akamai couldn't as well?
He committed fraud upon the customers, who thought they were getting the real thing.
Have you actually read TFA? (Of course not, what was I thinking!?!).
He was convicted of fraud. In a court of law. By a Judge and Lawyers that actually HAVE law degrees. Stop arguing about fraud. He pleaded guilty. He is guilty. That ship has sailed.
Quote TFA:
According to a statement of facts read during Bi’s plea hearing, agents executed a search warrant at Bi’s house and found multiple CD duplicators and more than 1,000 PRINTED counterfeit CDs.
He represented these as real, there is no evidence he showed sharpie disks. You made that up.
But seeking damages is the responsibility of the copyright holder. The Government does not go out and seek damages for you.
Having this conviction on the books, the copyright holders should be able to sue the guy and get. .. ... Nothing!
Because ICE already confiscated everything.
Seeing as how he was ripping off dozens of titles, it probably made more sense than 50 or 60 court cases each seeking the same pile of money.
That and the fact he was ratted out by his employer for using company email addresses to move his secret lists of accounts.
Lets face it, the cops were handed this case on a silver platter.
Go here.
Arrest him.
Confiscate 300K in ill-gotten funds.
Have a beer.
No, you don't need one within every ISP.
A few at major backbone hubs routing to your fastest least busy server is all you need.
Nobody would use anycast if it required a DNS server in EVERY ISP.
The point here is that routing a request to a server near the DNS server is fundamentally the wrong thing to do. You route to the server closest to the end user.
Wouldn't trademark infringement be a civil matter?
counterfeit (tr. v.) 1. To make a copy of, usually with the intent to defraud
He defrauded the copyright holder for certain.
He may also have defrauded the buyer who may have thought they were buying legitimate goods.
Duplicating copyrighted material is both counterfeiting and infringing. So I'm at a loss to see your distinction here.
BTW:
Have you ever seen anyone advertise something as unauthorized copies?
So he gets 6 months for *selling* *35,000* games, but Jammie Thomas-Rasset gets 1.X Million for copying 24 songs?
Don't assume we know every part of the plea agreement.
Who knows how many others he might have ratted out?
Who knows how much money and off shore bank accounts were seized prior to trial, which just sort of become property of ICE?
Governments multi-task - a concept that also seems strangely foreign to the geek.
Well said.
Why is it anything accomplished by government is always a waste of time and money just because something else (speakers pet project) is not accomplished first?
Its a hell of a lot easier and less expensive to take down a disk duplicator when the aggrieved copyright holder calls you up and tells you exactly where the disks are coming from and files an official complaint, than it is to invade yet another country to get Osama.
Who would want a government capable of solving all problems simultaneously and in the right sequence to satisfy every citizens priorities.
Law, learn it.
YOU have satisfied your obligation if you provide a means of to obtain it.
YOU do not have to run a web site.
YOU do not have to physically hand the source code over on a CD.
YOU can hire someone, or merely have an agreement with someone.
YOU have no idea what the hell YOU are talking about.
GPLv3 is the wrong license I believe.
Android is GPLv2 and Apache 2.0.
http://source.android.com/source/licenses.html
For most, simply coming into compliance is all they are ever asked to do in court.
Some busybox (etc) providers drag their heels on even that, but most simply hang it on their website in some obscure place and call it a day. Most of these devices are obsolete before anyone notices the missing source code.
Its not hard to comply, its just that Joe Purchasing Agent has no clue he is supposed to do so when he buys a cheesy tablet from an OEM and changes nothing but the label on the back.
I like how you selectively quote things.
Did you miss the part about:
" on a medium customarily used for software interchange"
Translation: Website. No where does it say who has to run that web site.
Case closed.
Get off you high horse.
So after all the drama we are agreed that there is no requirement to SHIP the source?
Wow. What a long way to go to get to that cleared up.
Samsung always makes source available. Not necessarily instantly, sometimes it takes a month or so.
ARCHOS always makes it available. Imagine that! Archos!?
The rest? Well without digging thru their documentation, web sites, and "about screens" I can't be sure there isn't a written notice somewhere, and have to take the authors word that he did an exhaustive search. I have no doubt some are ignorant of this requirement.
Exactly.
Where do you see the word SHIP in there?
b) says a web address is sufficient.
Why is this so hard for you to understand?
And "way" number 2 is the only one necessary for a tablet.
If a website is mentioned, somewhere in the paperwork or in the on screen menus, the manufacturer has met his obligation.
You do not have to SHIP the source.
Exactly.
But some here insist you must PERSONALLY host it. This bit is not true. Nor need you ship it.
You need simply to make it available SOMEWHERE for three years.
If you have been over it 1000 times, why did you quote the part about object code rather than the part about source code?
Commercial distributors must either ship the source with the binary or they themselves have to make the source available.
[citation needed]
They need only make it available. They can hire someone else to do so. They need not set up a server for downloads.
You can not cite any source for the phrase "they themselves have to make".
Drivers are a debatable case.
Some insist anything linked against the kernel libraries (making calls to the kernel) must be make source code available. But I do not believe this is the general consensus.
Read the story.
Some do. Some don't.
For that to work the company earning profits from Android must contribute to hosting the source code. If that don't do that the version of android used on the tablet might not be available when needed.
The GPL makes no requirements as to who hosts the source code.
Well the point of the GP's Anycast comment was that simply using 8.8.8.8 as your dns server is not sufficient to pinpoint WHERE your dns comes from.
8.8.8.8 will resolve to different physical machines depending on the load balancing that Google is doing.
Your dns request might be served out of California on one hit, and out of Ireland on the next hit.
Akamai, by paying attention to where the DNS request came from is doing it fundamentally WRONG, because they could actually deny service (for national licensing reasons) based on location of the DNS server when the actual user was in a totally different (and legal) location.
It is sufficient if they use stock Android.
Making available does not require shipping, nor does it include hosting your own servers. You need merely "make it available". There are no specific requirements as to where it must be a available, and having the Open Handset Alliance perform this service is sufficient.
Samsung and some others are quite responsive in getting the source out there. Others not so much.
My only point in my post above is there is no requirement that the source be "shipped". It merely needs to be available along with any modifications a manufacturer makes to it.