Isn't Gnome released under the LGPL? So I think you could distribute a Gnome binary linked against XFree86 4.4.
I realise that the reason to use the LGPL for Gnome is that proprietary programs can be compiled against Gnome libs; but I guess it should work "the other way round" as well; ie linking XFree86 libs into Gnome.
(I don't have the exact terms of the LGPL in my head, so apologies if I'm wrong here.)
Monopolies are not allowed to set prices intentional lower then is possible for the competition.
Are you sure about that? Why not? What is the harm to consumers? This might be true for a regulated monopoly (eg the telecom incumbents in Europe), where the regulatory authority sets minimum and maximum prices. But why should this be true for a "normal" monopoly?
Sorry, you are talking about the first week in Economics 101.
Your reasoning is only (kind of) correct in a situation where there are no significant fixed costs and most of the cost of production is variable. If, however, fixed costs are high and variable costs are low (eg MS Windows), you will not have a stable market price at marginal costs as fixed costs will not be covered. That means that you will only have a low number of firms competing in the market, each with a certain degree of market power, which allows it to increase prices above marginal costs.
This is what we observe here. MS is IMHO not pricing predatorily when it is charging $23m for Windows, because this is still way above marginal cost. It's not good for MS though, as it can't charge monopoly prices anymore. On the other hand, it might have to fear somewhat less from the antitrust authorities as it might not be considered dominant anymore (if not now, hopefully in some years down the road!).
Linux is a derivative of AIX, which is a derivative of System V, which is owned by SCO. Emacs works with Linux so it is a derivative of SCO as well (remember the viral license?). When HURD is bundled with Emacs, it will be a derivative of SCO as well. No need to sue. SCO can start collecting money directly from RMS.
The cap is indeed for the turnover over one year and not over the time of infringement. It is a hard cap presumably designed to prevent companies going bust. However, a fine will generally be much lower than this. Usually, the amount of the fine will be determined by the type of infringement, the severity of infringement, the length of infringement and the willingness to co-operate with the European Commission.
In fact, the fine is capped at 10% of the undertaking's total worldwide turnover in the previous year. So, the fine could be a maximum of $3,500,000,000.
Well, let me rephrase: I would expect them to prioritize some of the corresponding right images higher than all the other left images, in order to get a stereoscopic picture soon to estimate the size of the crater etc.
Why do they only have the left pan cam images - the right camera should be taking pictures as well? And I find it funny that they don't try and send some stereoscopic color images.
I don't think so. The fact that there are different prices in the UK and HK shows that the record companies have a certain degree of market power. Hence, Schmalensee's model is applicable. See Schmalensee, R., 1981, 'Output and Welfare Implications of monopolistic Third-Degree
Price Discrimination', American Economic Review, 71, pp.242-247.
The crux is that you have different demand curves in HK and UK, which lead to different profit-maximising prices, if you are able to price discriminate. If you can't price discriminate, you only face one combined demand curve, the combined demand of the UK and HK - if you work through the maths, you will see that the resulting profit-maximising price will necessarily be inbetween the other two prices. Also, in most cases (though not all), output will be higher in a situation with price discrimination than without it. And I believe that Schmalensee shows in his paper that if output goes up, welfare goes up as well.
Before starting to blame the BPI too much, you should consider that these parallel imports of CDs into the UK would, if they account for a significant part of total sales, lead an equalisation of prices in Hong Kong and the UK. This implies that prices in Hong Kong would become higher and prices in the UK would become lower. Overall, most economic models would predict that less CDs would be sold overall. This, however, implies that under the current situation of price discrimination, profits of the record companies are higher and overall consumer welfare is higher as well. If CD-Wow were to be allowed to sell the CDs in the UK, the welfare of the consumers in the UK would increase to a lesser extent than the welfare of customers in Hong Kong would decrease. So, I dare say: What the record companies are doing, is fair and good to consumers.
My Firebird has rendering bugs under both Windows and KDE... Don't you see the odd pixel line doubled or left out? It's Gecko in fact so it also happens in Seamonkey. This seems to be especially the case if you run at a non-standard font size (I have 110% in Windows for example). The reason seems some rounding problem in the rendering.
I'm pretty sure the EU *comission* can't hand out fines or anything. Everything like that still has to go through the court.
I'm afraid you are wrong. The Commission can hand out huge fines completely by themselves, without any approval of a court. See for example any fines for cartel members found guilty. These companies have recourse at the Courts though, first at the Court of First Instance and then at the European Court of Justice. I think they can only appeal a decision by the Commission on procedural grounds though, not on factual grounds.
Darl McBride receives about 600,000 thousand stock options upon achieving 4 consecutive profitable quarters.
If I recall correctly, there might be a slight problem for him. I think that he would not be allowed to convert the options into shares immediately but has to hold on to them for a while. The problem is that the shares will be so low by then that these options are not worth much anymore. (And in fact they have to be low, otherwise SCOG wouldn't be making any profits!) I think Darl is fcuked in any case.
I don't disagree with you but I don't think "Linux" is a good example. "Linux" is trademarked and only used when referring to the Linux Kernel/Operating System (ok, there is some confusion here as well...) - hence it is not a word that is part of the English language. "Playboy", however, also has other meanings besides the trademarked one: "A man who lives a life devoted chiefly to the pursuit of pleasure."
Well, looking at your history, not much of what you post is yours - either taken from other websites or simply copied comments that received high scores in previous discussions. Just stop it, it's plain silly.
Slashdot Mirror
I realise that the reason to use the LGPL for Gnome is that proprietary programs can be compiled against Gnome libs; but I guess it should work "the other way round" as well; ie linking XFree86 libs into Gnome.
(I don't have the exact terms of the LGPL in my head, so apologies if I'm wrong here.)
Note that this is not a joke. It is true. They even referenced the blank lines 30 and 33.
Are you sure about that? Why not? What is the harm to consumers? This might be true for a regulated monopoly (eg the telecom incumbents in Europe), where the regulatory authority sets minimum and maximum prices. But why should this be true for a "normal" monopoly?
Your reasoning is only (kind of) correct in a situation where there are no significant fixed costs and most of the cost of production is variable. If, however, fixed costs are high and variable costs are low (eg MS Windows), you will not have a stable market price at marginal costs as fixed costs will not be covered. That means that you will only have a low number of firms competing in the market, each with a certain degree of market power, which allows it to increase prices above marginal costs.
This is what we observe here. MS is IMHO not pricing predatorily when it is charging $23m for Windows, because this is still way above marginal cost. It's not good for MS though, as it can't charge monopoly prices anymore. On the other hand, it might have to fear somewhat less from the antitrust authorities as it might not be considered dominant anymore (if not now, hopefully in some years down the road!).
Why is that -1? Netcraft shows (in the link of the grandparent) that they are running Linux!
Linux is a derivative of AIX, which is a derivative of System V, which is owned by SCO. Emacs works with Linux so it is a derivative of SCO as well (remember the viral license?). When HURD is bundled with Emacs, it will be a derivative of SCO as well. No need to sue. SCO can start collecting money directly from RMS.
The cap is indeed for the turnover over one year and not over the time of infringement. It is a hard cap presumably designed to prevent companies going bust. However, a fine will generally be much lower than this. Usually, the amount of the fine will be determined by the type of infringement, the severity of infringement, the length of infringement and the willingness to co-operate with the European Commission.
In fact, the fine is capped at 10% of the undertaking's total worldwide turnover in the previous year. So, the fine could be a maximum of $3,500,000,000.
Well, let me rephrase: I would expect them to prioritize some of the corresponding right images higher than all the other left images, in order to get a stereoscopic picture soon to estimate the size of the crater etc.
Why do they only have the left pan cam images - the right camera should be taking pictures as well? And I find it funny that they don't try and send some stereoscopic color images.
The crux is that you have different demand curves in HK and UK, which lead to different profit-maximising prices, if you are able to price discriminate. If you can't price discriminate, you only face one combined demand curve, the combined demand of the UK and HK - if you work through the maths, you will see that the resulting profit-maximising price will necessarily be inbetween the other two prices. Also, in most cases (though not all), output will be higher in a situation with price discrimination than without it. And I believe that Schmalensee shows in his paper that if output goes up, welfare goes up as well.
Before starting to blame the BPI too much, you should consider that these parallel imports of CDs into the UK would, if they account for a significant part of total sales, lead an equalisation of prices in Hong Kong and the UK. This implies that prices in Hong Kong would become higher and prices in the UK would become lower. Overall, most economic models would predict that less CDs would be sold overall. This, however, implies that under the current situation of price discrimination, profits of the record companies are higher and overall consumer welfare is higher as well. If CD-Wow were to be allowed to sell the CDs in the UK, the welfare of the consumers in the UK would increase to a lesser extent than the welfare of customers in Hong Kong would decrease. So, I dare say: What the record companies are doing, is fair and good to consumers.
http://ichart.yimg.com/y?s=NOVL&z=b&t=1d&c=SCO X
A couple of minutes later, however, prices were back at the level as they were before.
My Firebird has rendering bugs under both Windows and KDE... Don't you see the odd pixel line doubled or left out? It's Gecko in fact so it also happens in Seamonkey. This seems to be especially the case if you run at a non-standard font size (I have 110% in Windows for example). The reason seems some rounding problem in the rendering.
That clearly depends on the strike price of the option. If it is above $2.00, his options are worthless at expiry.
The UK has no constitution; hence, nothing is constitutionally protected in the UK!
I don't disagree with you but I don't think "Linux" is a good example. "Linux" is trademarked and only used when referring to the Linux Kernel/Operating System (ok, there is some confusion here as well...) - hence it is not a word that is part of the English language. "Playboy", however, also has other meanings besides the trademarked one: "A man who lives a life devoted chiefly to the pursuit of pleasure."
Well, looking at your history, not much of what you post is yours - either taken from other websites or simply copied comments that received high scores in previous discussions. Just stop it, it's plain silly.
There are still some modded up comments - it is just too easy to fall for the copy troll trick.
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=88726&cid=7678 053