"...distributors really need to take a hard look at their own internal processes and look at how they can stop the insider leaks of their movies before taking measures that might hamstring consumers' technologies and rights."
Hmmm.. let's see... spend millions of dollars a year on security for our own processes and suppliers... OR pay a couple lobbyists and maybe a lawyer or two to get the government to block any or all methods where people could share this effectively...
Gee... it's a hard decision... Millions per year... vs. a couple lobbyists and a couple of lawyers...
They say Unix code has been in Linux since 2001 and that vendors and end users have been profiting from this since then, and they want to be compensated for that
This is interesting. They claim that vendors and end users have been profiting from the code violation, and therefore they're entitled to compensation.
I have been running my own linux server, in my basement, for about +3 years now. I have made NO profit from it. In fact, I have SPENT money on a high-speed internet connections (IDSL and Broadband), purchased a new server to run linux on, upgraded networking equipment to support a faster server (switches, cat5e, etc.). So, near as I can figure:
Total: -$3740 Subtract off that a SCO license @ $699: -$3046
So, if SCO wants to 'share' in my 'profits', then their share comes to -$1523. Please make the cashiers check or money order payable to me, as my finance department tells me that SCO's business checks are 'questionable' and therefore not welcome here.
busily identifying Linux end users and is preparing to launch lawsuits against them
Let's see... $699. That's small claims court. As they haven't provided PROOF of anything, I'll be happy to meet them in small claims court for them to get their money. It'll cost 'em more than $699 to have their lawyer drive to the courthouse.
Thank you for tipping your hand. I was wondering what method you would use to refute our bogus^Hs^Hu^Hg^Hu^Hb copyright case, and so I released a false bit of code to a group of people that wouldn't know any better (after all, they resell our code) so you could demonstrate to me how you will research the origin of the code.
Now, I know EXACTLY how to cover my trail.. First, I have to get an injunction against this 'Way back machine' for copyright infringement and you will no longer be able to use it as a source to discover when things were posted to the net. Then, I need to purge all of the places referenced by this 'Way back machine', and therefore I can claim that your proof is invalid long enough to sell my stock^Hk^Hc^Ho^Ht^Hs^H ^Hy^Hm^H ^Hl^Hl^He^Hs win my case.
The security community breathed a collective sigh of relief that there would be no new influx of security patches to patch the new service pack until late next year.
Then they went back to tracking the CURRENT vulnerabilities.
I would agree that it's all about market share, if this would actually INCREASE sales of the REAL UNIXWARE software, or even help IMPROVE the real UNIXWARE software. Unfortunately, it won't, and SCO knows it. They know that if they EVER actually divulge the allegedly infringed code, that that code will be remove, and they will lose the ability to bully people into buying a 'UNIXWARE license".
It's almost like it's a strange case of blackmail, where they're trying to blackmail linux but they can't, so they're getting the end user to pay.
And they wonder why everyone hates SCO so much.. basically, it's a hostage/terrorist situation where innocents are 'attacked' because of a belief of some other injustice.
I would be willing to wager money that almost anyone working on the kernel from the 'net honestly doesn't want to infringe on code from anyone else. I know I would want a project I work on to be 100% my teams work.
There have been NUMEROUS cases of license violations against the GPL by other groups/companies, and the Linux communities approach is typcially "remove it and we're cool".
This SCO CRAP not at all about protecting their business, it's not about them having a strong product, and someone else threating the uniqueness of some product.
Instead, it's about SCO blackmailing, bulling, and threatening innocent bystanders and keeping them innocent bystanders by not allowing a code violation to be corrected. Instead they are attempting to profit from that 'mistake'.
The one thing this does tell me is that, if there was EVER a justification for the philosophies behind the FSF and the GPL, this is the perfect one.
Companies treat code as if it's the holy-grail of their business, when, in reality, it's the people who came UP with that IDEA, and implemented that are actually the real 'asset'.
At the pace of this industry, as soon as code is released, it's almost obsolete. But the ability to generate the ideas, or further develop them is what's important. If you're 'looking over your shoulder' all the time, then you've already behind.
Yeah, and you'd be amazed what 'apple -shop -computer' returns...
Could it be that most people, when searching for 'apple' are looking for the computer? Could it be that computer topics are more prominent than other topics?
Just for fun, search for 'apple' at search.msn.com and marvel at the diversity of their search.
Opera, while a nice, lean, fast browser, has a couple of major flaws in it that would ever keep it from being the king of the heap:
1) It isn't free. People haven't been paying for browsers since the web first started. IE was always free, and Netscape had that 'evaluation' clause that didn't have any boundry. People aren't going to want PAY for a browser, and then download 6 meg, and have nothing tangible to show for it. Unless Opera finds a business model where it's free, it will always be 'niche'.
2) I know I'm going to get a lot of flack for this, but, opera doesn't have a mail client. IE has Outlook Express. Mozilla has Mail&News. If Joe Homepc doesn't want to buy a browser, you can BET they don't want to go out after that and buy a mail client. Email, after all these years, is STILL the killer app for the Internet. Mom's and Dad's aren't getting internet access because they like CSS. Email is the first reason, and then, MAYBE, the web after that.
Opera is a great browser for those who have very specific requirements for a web browser, but it is not the 'browser for the common man'.
Spoken like a true document publisher: someone who believes that PRESENTATION is more important than CONTENT.
The beauty of the web (server, protocol, browser) when it first came out was that it was a simple technology that could be used to publish information. And that medium went straight to hell with the invention of borderless tables. Suddenly, presentation became king. "My graphics have to line up".
Hell, even CSS was invented because people were doing SO much with tables and layout that the web-pages themselves were becoming HUGE.
I just wish people would remember that it's the INFORMATION on a page that's important, and not the layout of that information.
USA TODAY: Is there a scenario by which you would at some point consider porting Microsoft applications into Linux?
BG: There's no consideration of that at this point.
Of course there's no consideration of that. By even CONSIDERING it, Gates would be dispelling the FUD that he and his minions have been spewing for years. By MS porting something to LINUX would indicate that Linux was a 'viable' platform.
You don't spend money on something that you are expecting to go away (or have taken away by you're little SCO minion.
Well, they didn't REALLY ask for any trade secrets. All they want is a boot-loader that is digitally signed so it can run on the xbox WITHOUT A MOD CHIP. They didn't ask MS how to MAKE a bootloader.. There is no loss of trade secret... only loss of control for the XBOX...
I wonder what would happen in Microsoft released a LINUX kit for the XBOX, including a distro, and the works (a la Sony and the PS/2)... The loader could still be proprietary...
Sense of humor my ass. That is SCO property, which is a place of business. If the management at SCO allowed THEIR employees to place those signs out in front of their building during business hours, then they CONDONED the posters. It wasn't a sense of humor, but a glimpse at a childish, petty organization that only comes across as 'smug'.
Whether they have a valid basis for a lawsuit or not, I expect companies to act like grown-ups. I've seen to many articles recently where executives, management, and lawyers result to threats, and childish statements.
Slashdot Mirror
How many of them use some sort of full-screened terminal application to access the information anyway?
What difference would that make? It's still a win against microsoft... Even terminal based applications still need an OS underneath it.
Oh, and I don't think they're as behind-the-times as you think they are... You can bet they're not designing cars in VT100 terminal windows....
"...distributors really need to take a hard look at their own internal processes and look at how they can stop the insider leaks of their movies before taking measures that might hamstring consumers' technologies and rights."
Hmmm.. let's see... spend millions of dollars a year on security for our own processes and suppliers... OR pay a couple lobbyists and maybe a lawyer or two to get the government to block any or all methods where people could share this effectively...
Gee... it's a hard decision... Millions per year... vs. a couple lobbyists and a couple of lawyers...
Wait... let me think...
I'll get it... just a sec...
They say Unix code has been in Linux since 2001 and that vendors and end users have been profiting from this since then, and they want to be compensated for that
This is interesting. They claim that vendors and end users have been profiting from the code violation, and therefore they're entitled to compensation.
I have been running my own linux server, in my basement, for about +3 years now. I have made NO profit from it. In fact, I have SPENT money on a high-speed internet connections (IDSL and Broadband), purchased a new server to run linux on, upgraded networking equipment to support a faster server (switches, cat5e, etc.). So, near as I can figure:
ISP: 36 months @ $70/month (don't ask) = $2520
Server: PowerEdge 600SC w/ Raid card+4 disks = $1000
8 port switch: $125
Box of Cat5e w/ connectors: $100
Total: -$3740
Subtract off that a SCO license @ $699: -$3046
So, if SCO wants to 'share' in my 'profits', then their share comes to -$1523. Please make the cashiers check or money order payable to me, as my finance department tells me that SCO's business checks are 'questionable' and therefore not welcome here.
You might as well take advanteage of it:
Security-vulnerable software == shorter backwards-compatibility requirements.
busily identifying Linux end users and is preparing to launch lawsuits against them
Let's see... $699. That's small claims court. As they haven't provided PROOF of anything, I'll be happy to meet them in small claims court for them to get their money. It'll cost 'em more than $699 to have their lawyer drive to the courthouse.
Bad business model.
Dear Open Source Community.
Thank you for tipping your hand. I was wondering what method you would use to refute our bogus^Hs^Hu^Hg^Hu^Hb copyright case, and so I released a false bit of code to a group of people that wouldn't know any better (after all, they resell our code) so you could demonstrate to me how you will research the origin of the code.
Now, I know EXACTLY how to cover my trail.. First, I have to get an injunction against this 'Way back machine' for copyright infringement and you will no longer be able to use it as a source to discover when things were posted to the net. Then, I need to purge all of the places referenced by this 'Way back machine', and therefore I can claim that your proof is invalid long enough to sell my stock^Hk^Hc^Ho^Ht^Hs^H ^Hy^Hm^H ^Hl^Hl^He^Hs win my case.
You fools! (insert meniacle laugh here)
The security community breathed a collective sigh of relief that there would be no new influx of security patches to patch the new service pack until late next year.
Then they went back to tracking the CURRENT vulnerabilities.
Hello!?!? Captains Quarters aboard SeaQuest: DSV. Old geezer shows up on a screen made of downward projected fog.
Now, if they had blasted the fog upwards, then THAT would have been news!
Part of the claim demands that SCO stop shipping all of the software infringing on IBM's patents, which is essentially all of SCO's software.
To both customers? What is that, 2 licenses?
They'll be devistated!
I would agree that it's all about market share, if this would actually INCREASE sales of the REAL UNIXWARE software, or even help IMPROVE the real UNIXWARE software. Unfortunately, it won't, and SCO knows it. They know that if they EVER actually divulge the allegedly infringed code, that that code will be remove, and they will lose the ability to bully people into buying a 'UNIXWARE license".
It's almost like it's a strange case of blackmail, where they're trying to blackmail linux but they can't, so they're getting the end user to pay.
And they wonder why everyone hates SCO so much.. basically, it's a hostage/terrorist situation where innocents are 'attacked' because of a belief of some other injustice.
I would be willing to wager money that almost anyone working on the kernel from the 'net honestly doesn't want to infringe on code from anyone else. I know I would want a project I work on to be 100% my teams work.
There have been NUMEROUS cases of license violations against the GPL by other groups/companies, and the Linux communities approach is typcially "remove it and we're cool".
This SCO CRAP not at all about protecting their business, it's not about them having a strong product, and someone else threating the uniqueness of some product.
Instead, it's about SCO blackmailing, bulling, and threatening innocent bystanders and keeping them innocent bystanders by not allowing a code violation to be corrected. Instead they are attempting to profit from that 'mistake'.
The one thing this does tell me is that, if there was EVER a justification for the philosophies behind the FSF and the GPL, this is the perfect one.
Companies treat code as if it's the holy-grail of their business, when, in reality, it's the people who came UP with that IDEA, and implemented that are actually the real 'asset'.
At the pace of this industry, as soon as code is released, it's almost obsolete. But the ability to generate the ideas, or further develop them is what's important. If you're 'looking over your shoulder' all the time, then you've already behind.
Denny Dillon, center, leads a shift of telemarketers at Quality Service Management in this AP file photo
Quality Service Management !?!?!?! What the hell is that? Could they come up with a more non-descript name for a company?
I'm sure they picked that name so that it would look inconspicuous on the building index in the lobby, to confuse the people who want to blow it up...
No matter what you say, *someone* will disagree.
No they won't.
Yeah, and you'd be amazed what 'apple -shop -computer' returns...
Could it be that most people, when searching for 'apple' are looking for the computer? Could it be that computer topics are more prominent than other topics?
Just for fun, search for 'apple' at search.msn.com and marvel at the diversity of their search.
is combine this with RFID tags, and it'll be like 1984, for real!
Think of it this way:
1) Mozilla development and advocacy becomes a non-profit organization.
2) AOL/Time Warner contributes all the same money that they used to contribute.
3) AOL/Time Warner now gets to write off the contribution because it's to a non-profit organization.
Opera, while a nice, lean, fast browser, has a couple of major flaws in it that would ever keep it from being the king of the heap:
1) It isn't free. People haven't been paying for browsers since the web first started. IE was always free, and Netscape had that 'evaluation' clause that didn't have any boundry. People aren't going to want PAY for a browser, and then download 6 meg, and have nothing tangible to show for it. Unless Opera finds a business model where it's free, it will always be 'niche'.
2) I know I'm going to get a lot of flack for this, but, opera doesn't have a mail client.
IE has Outlook Express. Mozilla has Mail&News. If Joe Homepc doesn't want to buy a browser, you can BET they don't want to go out after that and buy a mail client. Email, after all these years, is STILL the killer app for the Internet. Mom's and Dad's aren't getting internet access because they like CSS. Email is the first reason, and then, MAYBE, the web after that.
Opera is a great browser for those who have very specific requirements for a web browser, but it is not the 'browser for the common man'.
Spoken like a true document publisher: someone who believes that PRESENTATION is more important than CONTENT.
The beauty of the web (server, protocol, browser) when it first came out was that it was a simple technology that could be used to publish information. And that medium went straight to hell with the invention of borderless tables. Suddenly, presentation became king. "My graphics have to line up".
Hell, even CSS was invented because people were doing SO much with tables and layout that the web-pages themselves were becoming HUGE.
I just wish people would remember that it's the INFORMATION on a page that's important, and not the layout of that information.
USA TODAY: Is there a scenario by which you would at some point consider porting Microsoft applications into Linux?
BG: There's no consideration of that at this point.
Of course there's no consideration of that. By even CONSIDERING it, Gates would be dispelling the FUD that he and his minions have been spewing for years. By MS porting something to LINUX would indicate that Linux was a 'viable' platform.
You don't spend money on something that you are expecting to go away (or have taken away by you're little SCO minion.
Get 'em before the rush:
l la 1.4/
ftp://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla/releases/mozi
"Reveal your trade secrets Gates"
Well, they didn't REALLY ask for any trade secrets. All they want is a boot-loader that is digitally signed so it can run on the xbox WITHOUT A MOD CHIP. They didn't ask MS how to MAKE a bootloader.. There is no loss of trade secret... only loss of control for the XBOX...
I wonder what would happen in Microsoft released a LINUX kit for the XBOX, including a distro, and the works (a la Sony and the PS/2)... The loader could still be proprietary...
from the same organization that brought us $100 toilet seats and $500 hammers.
Walmart has licensed the "technology" from NetFlix?
Sense of humor my ass. That is SCO property, which is a place of business. If the management at SCO allowed THEIR employees to place those signs out in front of their building during business hours, then they CONDONED the posters. It wasn't a sense of humor, but a glimpse at a childish, petty organization that only comes across as 'smug'.
Whether they have a valid basis for a lawsuit or not, I expect companies to act like grown-ups. I've seen to many articles recently where executives, management, and lawyers result to threats, and childish statements.
What ever happened to professionalism?
the ambulance-chaser of the computer world.
Is it me, or does Suns bid for AIX customers reek of
1) Telephone companies
2) Telemarketers (in general)
3) Any TV commercial for ANY polidition in ANY race.