Because, AFAIK, antitrust law has no concept of "penalty"... only "remedy". The whole purpose of antitrust laws (and the violations thereof) is to solve the problem of how to prevent the convicted monopolist from engaging in illegal behavior in the future.
This isn't like murder or rape; there is no "punishment"... only a "remedy".
By examining only those projects hosted by sourceforge, the author is biased against the most mature Open Source projects of all (none of which can be found there). Some of these being: the Linux kernel, Apache, bind, sendmail, Perl, Python, Mozilla, etc...
MS to Judge (in case of MS vs SAMBA): Sorry your honour, but they couldn't possibly have reverse engineered the new implementation; they must've used the published specs. This, your honour, violated the (some acronym) law.
Okay, so who is the judge going to believe? A group of convicted criminals who have a proven record of lying in court... or a group of nice young men who have dedicated their lives to what could be called a charitable endeavor?
Well... from looking at your posting history, it looks like you're still in school (and I'll have to assume that you've never really held a true, professional development position before).
I'll let you in on a little secret. A vast majority of the software developement jobs out there are *not* writing software for shrink-wrap, retail sale at the corner Best Buy.
I'd wager that a good 75% to 80% of the people graduating out of your CS program will take jobs as "in house" developers for some company that has absolutely nothing to do with the software industry. In that type of scenario, software development is a cost center, and companies like those to be as inexpensive as possible.
That right there is why Open Source is making so much headware in the corporate world (and is exactly why you should embrace it instead of hide from it).
...as opposed to the current air traffic control systems which are held together with spit and bailing-wire (and tend to crash way more often than I am comfortable thinking about).
I fear everyone here is completely missing the mark!
It's all about the ad-revenues. You see, Blizzard sells ads on and if they allow people to run their own servers, then it eats into their advertizing cash cow.
Their talk of piracy and the DMCA is all just a white-wash to pacify the good little sheeple into thinking they might be justified in their actions.
As Frank Herbert said, "Wealth is a tool of freedom, but the pursuit of wealth is the way to slavery."
when you switch cell phones just before stating the pick-up point for the anthrax the FBI will be able to follow the call. That's how.
How about someone providing a CREDIBLE scenario for abuse of this law?
Well, let's think about this for a second. How might the FBI actually impliment such a roving wiretap on cell-phones, hmm? How would they know which phone to tap to hear the second half of that conversions, hmmm?
Oh, I guess they'd just have to listen to ALL cell-phone conversations in the area.
In their quote from the GPL, they left out one
very important clause. Here's the whole section
(with their edited portion highlighted):
If
identifiable sections of that work are not derived from the Program,
and can be reasonably considered independent and separate works in
themselves, then this License, and its terms, do not apply to those
sections when you distribute them as separate works.
But when you
distribute the same sections as part of a whole which is a work based
on the Program, the distribution of the whole must be on the terms of
this License, whose permissions for other licensees extend to the
entire whole, and thus to each and every part regardless of who wrote it.
Thus, it is not the intent of this section to claim rights or contest
your rights to work written entirely by you; rather, the intent is to
exercise the right to control the distribution of derivative or
collective works based on the Program.
They don't seriously think that creative editing
can get them out of this, do they?
Slashdot Mirror
Because, AFAIK, antitrust law has no concept of "penalty"... only "remedy". The whole purpose of antitrust laws (and the violations thereof) is to solve the problem of how to prevent the convicted monopolist from engaging in illegal behavior in the future.
This isn't like murder or rape; there is no "punishment"... only a "remedy".
By examining only those projects hosted by sourceforge, the author is biased against the most mature Open Source projects of all (none of which can be found there). Some of these being: the Linux kernel, Apache, bind, sendmail, Perl, Python, Mozilla, etc...
All of these are developed by a community.
So there...
Yes... as a matter of fact, we do.
Okay, so who is the judge going to believe? A group of convicted criminals who have a proven record of lying in court... or a group of nice young men who have dedicated their lives to what could be called a charitable endeavor?
Hmmm...??
Well... from looking at your posting history, it looks like you're still in school (and I'll have to assume that you've never really held a true, professional development position before).
I'll let you in on a little secret. A vast majority of the software developement jobs out there are *not* writing software for shrink-wrap, retail sale at the corner Best Buy.
I'd wager that a good 75% to 80% of the people graduating out of your CS program will take jobs as "in house" developers for some company that has absolutely nothing to do with the software industry. In that type of scenario, software development is a cost center, and companies like those to be as inexpensive as possible.
That right there is why Open Source is making so much headware in the corporate world (and is exactly why you should embrace it instead of hide from it).
It *is* the future.
...as opposed to the current air traffic control systems which are held together with spit and bailing-wire (and tend to crash way more often than I am comfortable thinking about).
I fear everyone here is completely missing the mark!
It's all about the ad-revenues. You see, Blizzard sells ads on and if they allow people to run their own servers, then it eats into their advertizing cash cow.
Their talk of piracy and the DMCA is all just a white-wash to pacify the good little sheeple into thinking they might be justified in their actions.
As Frank Herbert said, "Wealth is a tool of freedom, but the pursuit of wealth is the way to slavery."
Okay... if that's the case, then why isn't Pete Rose in the Hall of Fame, hmmm?
How about someone providing a CREDIBLE scenario for abuse of this law?
Well, let's think about this for a second. How might the FBI actually impliment such a roving wiretap on cell-phones, hmm? How would they know which phone to tap to hear the second half of that conversions, hmmm?
Oh, I guess they'd just have to listen to ALL cell-phone conversations in the area.
Doesn't this sound terribly scary to you?
In their quote from the GPL, they left out one very important clause. Here's the whole section (with their edited portion highlighted):
They don't seriously think that creative editing can get them out of this, do they?