Re:not accessible from China?
on
Groklaw Turns One
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
I think it is because we share our webserver with a few Tibetan websites (All Ibiblio websites are blocked). Off course, the censors in China won't tell anyone why a certain website is filtered, even when asked!
In the Netherlands it is legal (under certain conditions) to reverse engineer a program "to create an interoperable program". I have all reasons to believe Markus Kern when he sais that his reverse engineering of the Kazaa network is legal in Germany.
The law in the USA is quite different in this respect and it could be that you'll be fried when attempting such a thing there. (Jon Johansen was acquitted in Norway for DeCSS, while those in the US that only linked to it were convicted.)
IANAL, if you want to try this at home see one (a lawyer) first.
I guess you should be able to create bootable DVD's for the XBOX with those burners. Anybody wants to try a Linux DVD image?
Dutch supreme court rules that ISP may forbid spam
on
Spam Bits
·
· Score: 4, Informative
The Dutch supreme court (Hoge Raad) ruled today (March 12) that an ISP can forbid a spammer to make use of their machines.
(press release in Dutch). "XS4ALL has exclusive rights on its computer capacity" and "Freedom of expression doesn't allow infringement on the rights of others".
Summary of the verdict: An ISP can demand that a spammer stops (ab)using the computer systems of the ISP for sending unsollicited email to its customers. If he continues after that, the spammer is infringing the ISP's rights.
Sorry, the socket interface come from Berkeley; the native networking implementation on System V is called TLI (Transport Layer Interface). [Source: W. Richard Stevens: Unix Network Programming] The BSD releases of Unix had networking before the AT&T versions.
SCO will have a hard time convincing any judge that it is more than an agent (getting 5% of System V license revenue) for Novell. Apple is largely covered by the Novell-UCB settlement. Microsoft is good friends with TSG after their contribution to the warchest. I guess Darl will call Redmond soon for a new donation.
There is a subtle but very important difference between copyright and patent law:
Patent law allows the patent holder to forbid production and use of his invention
Copyright law allows the copyright holder to limit copying (or public performance) of its creation. A copyright holder can not restrict private use of its creation.
The worst case (and the David Berlind states that correctly) is that Linux distribution is forbidden and that you can not legally upgrade your system without paying SCO. (10% chance)
Yes, this author of this article clearly did more research that just copying a SCO press release and phoning two "analysts". The problem is that he selectively uses the sources that support his position. (A bit like saying that Linux has 7 times more security breaches that Windows, if you ignore virusses and worms.)
He mentiones Red Hat's 10-Q, without mentioning SCO's filings that essentially warn that the company could be liquidated when licensing income stays low. IBM doesn't seem worried about the turns that their lawsuit takes...
There are several parties that have a financial interest in damaging Linux. SCO has lost a lot of their Unixware and Open Server customers to Linux. Microsoft fears Linux because it grows faster on the server market that Windows and it is a serious competitor in the embedded and telephony markets. Linux is even eating at the margins in the desktop market.
I have the feeling that all this indemnification FUD is designed to make Linux more expensive. Linux is not "gratis", it cost time to download, install, configure and manage. These are costs that every OS bears though.
You could be right that market forces are trying to split up the Open Source movement... and use "the media" as proxy.
As soon as the Linux kernel starts "phoning home", I can fix it because I have the sources and the GPL allows me. Linus Thorvalds knows that, so he is very reluctant in adding spyware to the kernel. When Windows XP starts phoning home, the MS EULA doesn't allow me to do anything about it. Bill Gates knows that and is looking for ways to get more dollars out of his Windows licenses.
Part of the problem is that SCO keeps amending their case against IBM, so you are never sure what to expect next.
Well, that problem is over. SCO's deadline for amending their complaint passed Feb 4th. (They did ask for an infinite extension, but I'ld be surprised if they get that.) They could use two weeks for fixing typos and numbering errors.
You are ignoring the fact that KISS A/S is a Danish company and the alleged infringement should be seen from the viewpoint of Danish law. They are wrong if they used mplayer code directly; but I am not convinced from what I've seen on the mplayer website that there was an infringement. It could be that KISS and mplayer both based their code on the same documentation.
I would have done some more investigation before posting public allegations.
SCO's actions in this case carry a certain smell. They accuse IBM from providing trade secret/copyrighted (the story changes regularily) code to Linux, but are unwilling to specify, even in the court documents, what the infringing code is.
The problem is that SCO accuses everyone in the press, but refuses to show proof. We wait "with bated breath" what SCO will provide as answer to Judge Well's order to state what the basis for their lawsuit against IBM is.
Yes, I am the webmaster of GrokLaw and I've taken some measures to serve the Slashdot crowd. We gracefully (Pamela more gracefull than me) accept donations. The bandwidth and servers are provided by Ibiblio, many thanks for that.
Please come to the site; we should be able to handle the Slashdot crowd.
I bought SuSE 8.2 Pro for 50 Euro (update) with the usual "install on as many systems as you can" license. Knowlegable people know how to perform a network install...
Yesterday (friday) I moved the site to Ibiblio... because the server couldn't cope with the Slashdot attack. (I planned to do it quitetly today.)
I heard several people ask "what is it like to have your server slashdotted? It is NO FUN! You see the workload on your machine rise above 40; top slows to a crawl, and all kind of weird things are happening because your machine is:
- running out of processes
- running out of swap space
- running out of file descriptors And it isn't able to perform its usual tasks.
As a webmaster of a site that's regulary mentioned here I know that i need to take some protective measures to prevent a meltdown. (I have seen the groklaw.com server suffer from previous Slashdot attacks.)
You got me working hard this afternoon, moving the whole site to Ibiblio. (The move was planned for the weekend). Say hello to groklaw.net.
(3) SCO has a license to sell UNIX licenses. It recently has registered copyrights on the AT&T code. (I dunno whether Novell agrees with that.) Parts of the SysV code come from BSD; others come from the ancient UNIX code with removed copyright notices. AT&T lost copyright on the old UNIX code according to the judge in the USL-BSD case. SCO may own the copyrights on (at most) part of the UNIX code.
Well, I did make a phonecall to SCO.nl (around 09:00 MEST, 07:00 UTC) and got a connection to one of their salespeople, not that he was very helpfull... It was clear anyway that he had been briefed about the situation and that some procedures were in place to handle licencing inquiries.
They couldn't offer me a quote for the price in Euro's in the Netherlands; the only thing the salesman had to say was that "prices would be in line with the US prices". It could be that they ment they would just bill the dollar amount, anyway the exact price didn't have my priority.
On the question of whether or why I would need a license the only thing SCO had to offer was FUD. I should ask legal advice and check whether the licenses we currently had were good enough. They didn't confirm or deny that they distributed Linux kernels under the GPL. They refused to confirm that I needed a SCO licence. And then the "seek legal advice" came up again.
It could be a good strategic option to go for a dual licensing strategy. You'll have to make clear to both your paying customers and the open source users and contributors what the rules of the game are.
I would recommend you to set up a small company with the co-developers of your software. It gives a lot of clarity about the ownership of the software and you can all become employees with your own company. In most countries the employer of a programmer becomes the copyright owner of the software that the programmer writes. And being your own employers...;) You'll need legal advice in setting up the company.
The company doesn't have to live from licensing alone. Consultancy is another way of making money. Be sure to make it clear in every consultancy contract what the copyright status of written software is, your liabilities, etc. Legal advice will save you a lot of money in the long run.
Slashdot Mirror
I think it is because we share our webserver with a few Tibetan websites (All Ibiblio websites are blocked). Off course, the censors in China won't tell anyone why a certain website is filtered, even when asked!
The law in the USA is quite different in this respect and it could be that you'll be fried when attempting such a thing there. (Jon Johansen was acquitted in Norway for DeCSS, while those in the US that only linked to it were convicted.)
IANAL, if you want to try this at home see one (a lawyer) first.
I wonder why Slashdot rehashes those April foolsday stories long after the appropriate day is over.
I guess you should be able to create bootable DVD's for the XBOX with those burners. Anybody wants to try a Linux DVD image?
Summary of the verdict: An ISP can demand that a spammer stops (ab)using the computer systems of the ISP for sending unsollicited email to its customers. If he continues after that, the spammer is infringing the ISP's rights.
SCO will have a hard time convincing any judge that it is more than an agent (getting 5% of System V license revenue) for Novell. Apple is largely covered by the Novell-UCB settlement. Microsoft is good friends with TSG after their contribution to the warchest. I guess Darl will call Redmond soon for a new donation.
- Patent law allows the patent holder to forbid production and use of his invention
- Copyright law allows the copyright holder to limit copying (or public performance) of its creation. A copyright holder can not restrict private use of its creation.
The worst case (and the David Berlind states that correctly) is that Linux distribution is forbidden and that you can not legally upgrade your system without paying SCO. (10% chance)He mentiones Red Hat's 10-Q, without mentioning SCO's filings that essentially warn that the company could be liquidated when licensing income stays low. IBM doesn't seem worried about the turns that their lawsuit takes...
There are several parties that have a financial interest in damaging Linux. SCO has lost a lot of their Unixware and Open Server customers to Linux. Microsoft fears Linux because it grows faster on the server market that Windows and it is a serious competitor in the embedded and telephony markets. Linux is even eating at the margins in the desktop market.
I have the feeling that all this indemnification FUD is designed to make Linux more expensive. Linux is not "gratis", it cost time to download, install, configure and manage. These are costs that every OS bears though.
You could be right that market forces are trying to split up the Open Source movement... and use "the media" as proxy.
It smells like a SCO to me!
As soon as the Linux kernel starts "phoning home", I can fix it because I have the sources and the GPL allows me. Linus Thorvalds knows that, so he is very reluctant in adding spyware to the kernel.
When Windows XP starts phoning home, the MS EULA doesn't allow me to do anything about it. Bill Gates knows that and is looking for ways to get more dollars out of his Windows licenses.
Grabbing the pdf shouldn't be a problem for Ibiblio's servers: try IBM Report on SCO "Compliance" here.
You forgot that Caldera (now called SCO) allready sued Microsoft and won. The (in-)famous DR-DOS case!
Did you count Greg Page, the first CTO from Caldera?
I would have done some more investigation before posting public allegations.
The problem is that SCO accuses everyone in the press, but refuses to show proof. We wait "with bated breath" what SCO will provide as answer to Judge Well's order to state what the basis for their lawsuit against IBM is.
Please come to the site; we should be able to handle the Slashdot crowd.
I bought SuSE 8.2 Pro for 50 Euro (update) with the usual "install on as many systems as you can" license.
Knowlegable people know how to perform a network install...
Yesterday (friday) I moved the site to Ibiblio... because the server couldn't cope with the Slashdot attack. (I planned to do it quitetly today.)
I heard several people ask "what is it like to have your server slashdotted?
It is NO FUN! You see the workload on your machine rise above 40; top slows to a crawl, and all kind of weird things are happening because your machine is:
- running out of processes
- running out of swap space
- running out of file descriptors
And it isn't able to perform its usual tasks.
I'm glad that we're at Ibiblio now!
You got me working hard this afternoon, moving the whole site to Ibiblio. (The move was planned for the weekend). Say hello to groklaw.net.
And (3) needs some nuance:
(3) SCO has a license to sell UNIX licenses. It recently has registered copyrights on the AT&T code. (I dunno whether Novell agrees with that.) Parts of the SysV code come from BSD; others come from the ancient UNIX code with removed copyright notices. AT&T lost copyright on the old UNIX code according to the judge in the USL-BSD case.
SCO may own the copyrights on (at most) part of the UNIX code.
It is clear that SCO doesn't know UNIX history.
Well, I did make a phonecall to SCO.nl (around 09:00 MEST, 07:00 UTC) and got a connection to one of their salespeople, not that he was very helpfull... It was clear anyway that he had been briefed about the situation and that some procedures were in place to handle licencing inquiries.
They couldn't offer me a quote for the price in Euro's in the Netherlands; the only thing the salesman had to say was that "prices would be in line with the US prices". It could be that they ment they would just bill the dollar amount, anyway the exact price didn't have my priority.
On the question of whether or why I would need a license the only thing SCO had to offer was FUD. I should ask legal advice and check whether the licenses we currently had were good enough. They didn't confirm or deny that they distributed Linux kernels under the GPL. They refused to confirm that I needed a SCO licence. And then the "seek legal advice" came up again.
I would recommend you to set up a small company with the co-developers of your software. It gives a lot of clarity about the ownership of the software and you can all become employees with your own company. In most countries the employer of a programmer becomes the copyright owner of the software that the programmer writes. And being your own employers... ;) You'll need legal advice in setting up the company.
The company doesn't have to live from licensing alone. Consultancy is another way of making money. Be sure to make it clear in every consultancy contract what the copyright status of written software is, your liabilities, etc. Legal advice will save you a lot of money in the long run.
IBM has changed significantly since those days.