As a Purdue grad, I can tell you that there have been many student 'book swap' services, both online and offline that have come and gone over the years. Most end up folding due to lack of use. And many of them are well promoted. The only thing I can think of is that many Purdue students (most undergrads?) are either going to school at their parents' expense or on scholarship/loans and they aren't terribly concerned about money. Sure, they bitch about being broke but they would rather pay the bookstores $100 for a book that can be sold back for $10 rather than put a little effort into selling books themselves.
SCO is starting to remind me of the kid on the playground who tells the other kids that he can fly. They ask him to show them, and he says he doesn't want to right now.
Is this meant to be a serious question? A theif in your car has as much right to privacy as a home burglar has to sleep in one of your beds. What you install in your car to be used by you is totally different than what someone else installs on your computer without your knowledge. What an apples to oranges comparison.
This method of evidence gathering would make the evidence definitely unadmissable in criminal court. In civil court, I think it would be a little more debatable, but if there was no indication in the program's license agreement or other documentation saying this would happen, I think the company might not have the best case. Especially since IPs can be faked/dynamic or whatever. Besides, how much are they really going to take in by suing some broke ass college students? It would make far more sense to just make the program uninstall itself.
Slashdot Mirror
As a Purdue grad, I can tell you that there have been many student 'book swap' services, both online and offline that have come and gone over the years. Most end up folding due to lack of use. And many of them are well promoted. The only thing I can think of is that many Purdue students (most undergrads?) are either going to school at their parents' expense or on scholarship/loans and they aren't terribly concerned about money. Sure, they bitch about being broke but they would rather pay the bookstores $100 for a book that can be sold back for $10 rather than put a little effort into selling books themselves.
SCO is starting to remind me of the kid on the playground who tells the other kids that he can fly. They ask him to show them, and he says he doesn't want to right now.
Is this meant to be a serious question? A theif in your car has as much right to privacy as a home burglar has to sleep in one of your beds. What you install in your car to be used by you is totally different than what someone else installs on your computer without your knowledge. What an apples to oranges comparison.
This method of evidence gathering would make the evidence definitely unadmissable in criminal court. In civil court, I think it would be a little more debatable, but if there was no indication in the program's license agreement or other documentation saying this would happen, I think the company might not have the best case. Especially since IPs can be faked/dynamic or whatever. Besides, how much are they really going to take in by suing some broke ass college students? It would make far more sense to just make the program uninstall itself.
Better yet, why is it running Windows?