Well, in the context of this story, we are not only talking about people getting sacked, but also about doctors who are running the risk of losing their license to practice medicine by making agreements that they are not allowed to make, under penalty of Federal law. If you look at the HIPAA website, the fines may seem small, but consider that knowing and wilfully violating these laws can lead to quite severe civil penalties that are not specified directly with HIPAA, but rather would be consequences of routinely breaking laws in general.
"There is one perfect solution: Keep proprietary OS machines off the network."
Sure that's good advice, until your application involves connectivity or else it is not useful to you.
There is a huge difference between the technical aspects of security and the legal aspects of granting permission.
The concern about regulatory compliance versus the licence agreement is about the legal aspects of granting permission. Whether that permission is ever execercised is completely irrelevant. If you made an agreement which by Federal law you were specifically forbidden to make, it makes no difference at all whether Microsoft or buttmonkeys accessed your computers, or whether you even plugged them in -- MAKING THE AGREEMENT was ILLEGAL, period.
The end result *should* be that Microsoft has made it so that certain industries cannot legally use their product. In reality though, simply because it's Microsoft, nothing will happen.
"For the past several days, I've been wondering if a lawsuit against Microsoft over the EULA for W2K Service Pack 3 might not be viable. If I were more motivated, I might even talk to a lawyer about it. "
You will need damages. You can't sue without showing damages.
However this HIPAA concern carries with it some dire implications. I wonder if it will actually get the attention of the appropriate people (let's say, a large hospital, prefereably one that is either a very influential one, e.g., the Naval Hospital in Bethesda which has the added benefit of being a governmental body, or say a big research institution, Johns Hopkins or Northwestern will do fine).
If it occurs to the right people (the ones with the bread to make a real difference) that the current licensing is entirely incompatable with the laws that the must follow, and that the exposure to liability is huge (it only takes one malpractice suit to end a doctor's career), then we might someday hear about a secondary license that is granted for certain institutions by Microsoft.
Unfortunately, I don't suppose many people are aware of this problem, so the phones at MS headquarters have not been ringing off the wall with attorneys who represent hospitals and physicians demanding satisfaction on this matter.
I suspect that it will take a federal lawsuit against someone who has been caught with their pants down, and this will be but one of many incidents of noncompliance with various regulations raised in the case.
The problem that many slashdot posters don't seem to understand is that we're not talking about an "illegal contract", but rather, that is might be technically illegal for a party to agree to a particular contract. This is only a problem if the party with the problematic contract will not negotiate, and is also only a problem if there is no alternative.
In many cases, there is only one choice for an operating system. If it is illegal for physicians to use that one choice, then it may be too high-risk for a physician to use computer systems for certain tasks at all.
It would appear that the intention is for an agent of the court to be able to evaluate the claims for himself. Thus, it might be relevant to specify what equipment would be required. It would make a lot more sense if the requirement had been for some specialized hardware, but you might want to consider how many law offices run [23]86's with wordperfect and novell networks, groupwise, and so on.
I always thought the First World referred to Europe since the Renaissance, the New World referred to the Americas, with the Third World being any nonindustrialized ("developing") country.
NWN does implement some good interface ideas, but this is not what I would call a "pie menu."
What I want to see in a pie menu is something like this:
A menu comprised of slices, where if the program designer wants to encourage the use of a specific function, that slice is larger and/or a lighter color. Or if a user tends to use a menu option more, that slice can dynamically grow larger. That way you can establish defaults (let's say 50% of the menu), or you can have an adaptive menu that adjusts to the users actual usage pattern over time.
The current logitech mouse driver has the closest thing I've seen to this type of implementation. I wish I could dig up the Byte and DDJ articles about pie menus from days gone by.
"Thus if the GPL is not enforceable recipients of copies of GPLd works have no right at all to create derivatives or distribute copies."
Okay, lets just say that Sigma is in violation of, or rejects, the GPL. What laws prevent them from shamelessly stealing the code? US copyright law? German copyright law? If XVID prevails in this case, will Sigma be allowed to continue their practice but not allowed to distribute to the US market?
"After all, if you're giving the code away, you can't be economically damaged by having someone copy it. "
I am not convinced that the $0 price tag even has to be admitted into the case.
This is a copyright violation. The unit price of the product is irrelevant.
If the XVID software were something else, say a film that was not yet ready for distribution. XVID hasn't sold it to anyone yet, and they haven't even decided whether they intend to sell it at all. Sigma takes that film and starts screening it at theatres.
Is it relevant that XVID never sold, or never intended to sell that film, or that they meant to broadcast it for free? In terms of copyright infringement, it is not at all relevant.
If I were the plaintiff in this case, I would try to ensure that the fact that my product was distributed for no charge was not even presented to the jury, because it is irrelevant and because it is easily misconstrued and distracts from the matter being judged.
The only thing that needs to be judged is whether copyright is infringed. Before that judgement can be made, it must be decided that Sigma was subject to the GPL, and to US copyright law, and that they have violated this license, or, if the license is not valid for Sigma, that they have violated US copyright law.
It is not clear to me at all that this German corporation is subject to US law to any degree.
If you were painting someone's house, and you found out for certain that they had no intention of ever paying you, would you keep painting the house? Or would you take your ladder, your paint, and your brush, and go elsewhere?
What if you were painting the house, and you found out that not only were you not going to get paid, but that the person was going to then take your ladder, your paint, your brush, your truck, and call the police to have you arrested for trespassing?
Would you stay and finish the job?
How would you feel about this story if the Sigma folks had finished their product, and then turned around and accused XVID of stealing THEIR work? Who's to say they STILL won't try that?
"The GPL is all about encouraging code sharing, not making a profit off someone's business plan that happens to involve reselling your code."
The GPL is supposed to encourage code development through sharing, and the way it encourages this is to raise the possibility of whopping huge-ass bankrupting fines for failure to comply with copyright law. Just like the big media companies with their licenses.
It's supposed to encourage sharing WHILE PROTECTING THE COPYRIGHT HOLDER.
"A few years ago I worked for a smart card company and we thought about doing this very thing. We realized very quickly, however, that the key securely stored on the smart card has to get passed out of the smart card and into software to be useable."
If you'd only patented it, you would now be in a position to either quash the development of this "technology" or else to collect royalties on all media sold with your invention.
Shouldn't the plaintiff pursue a civil case against the person who forged the letter to begin with? Seems like a criminal charge of fraud together with civil asset forfeiture would go a lot further than trying to sue verisign for "65 million".
"Floppies. Asking our users to mount and unmount a floppy disk was gonna be a chore. Floppies are used a lot. That was actually gonna be a headache. Windows with its waiting for the green light to go out and then pop it out is (in theory) a better solution from a user point."
Linux has had automounters for years. In fact, I installed RH7.3 this morning, and the automounter is enabled by default, so I didn't even have to configure it.
Not really meaning to split hairs, but the current evidence shows humans in the Western Hemisphere as early as 15,000 years ago.
Your statement of "250" years fails to take into account the period of exploration and colonization by Europeans, and totally disregards the Norse reaching Canada.
They act as if taking money from Mass to Nevada is a crime or something. I think it's just journalistic sugar, though, as it sounds just like a quote from Midnight Express.
If you win large amounts at a casino, they matter-of-factly do the tax reporting "for you", and unless the stakes they were using were ill-gotten, there was no reason for "smuggling" it.
Leaving the country with large amounts of cash is another matter.
"i don't think you can refute the taliban's involvement in the heroin industry. "
Not sure what you mean by 'refute' but one of the first things the taliban did when they took power was to crack down HARD on herion production. Opium cultivation became a capital offense under the taliban, where it was just a cash crop before.
"make sure you buy from a jeweller who shares your concerns - and they do exist."
Jewelers who get their wholesale diamonds from a source other than DeBeers... exist? Cite please.
Inspiron line has always had discrete video cards
on
Laptop Video Upgrade
·
· Score: 2
The Inspiron's are bigger and bulkier than the Latitudes; it's always been this way because they bring out the newer hardware on the Inspirons first, do the engineering to get it all on a single board, and then release the equivalent Latitude. If you change the video chip on a Latitude, it's maybe interesting. Changing the video card on an Inspiron is about as amazing as changing the disk drive or upgrading the RAM.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, in the context of this story, we are not
only talking about people getting sacked, but
also about doctors who are running the risk of
losing their license to practice medicine by making agreements that they are not allowed to make, under penalty of Federal law. If you look at the HIPAA website, the fines may seem small, but consider that knowing and wilfully violating these laws can lead to quite severe civil penalties that are not specified directly with HIPAA, but rather would be consequences of routinely breaking laws in general.
"There is one perfect solution: Keep proprietary OS machines off the network."
Sure that's good advice, until your application
involves connectivity or else it is not useful to you.
There is a huge difference between the technical
aspects of security and the legal aspects of granting permission.
The concern about regulatory compliance versus the licence agreement is about the legal aspects of granting permission. Whether that permission is ever execercised is completely irrelevant. If you made an agreement which by Federal law you were specifically forbidden to make, it makes no difference at all whether Microsoft or buttmonkeys accessed your computers, or whether you even plugged them in -- MAKING THE AGREEMENT was ILLEGAL, period.
The end result *should* be that Microsoft has made it so that certain industries cannot legally use their product. In reality though, simply because it's Microsoft, nothing will happen.
"For the past several days, I've been wondering if a lawsuit against Microsoft over the EULA for W2K Service Pack 3 might not be viable. If I were more motivated, I might even talk to a lawyer about it. "
You will need damages. You can't sue without showing damages.
However this HIPAA concern carries with it some dire implications. I wonder if it will actually get the attention of the appropriate people (let's say, a large hospital, prefereably one
that is either a very influential one, e.g., the
Naval Hospital in Bethesda which has the added benefit of being a governmental body, or say a
big research institution, Johns Hopkins or Northwestern will do fine).
If it occurs to the right people (the ones with the bread to make a real difference) that the current licensing is entirely incompatable with the laws that the must follow, and that the exposure to liability is huge (it only takes one malpractice suit to end a doctor's career), then
we might someday hear about a secondary license that is granted for certain institutions by Microsoft.
Unfortunately, I don't suppose many people are aware of this problem, so the phones at MS headquarters have not been ringing off the wall
with attorneys who represent hospitals and physicians demanding satisfaction on this matter.
I suspect that it will take a federal lawsuit against someone who has been caught with their pants down, and this will be but one of many incidents of noncompliance with various regulations raised in the case.
The problem that many slashdot posters don't seem
to understand is that we're not talking about an
"illegal contract", but rather, that is might be
technically illegal for a party to agree to a particular contract. This is only a problem if the party with the problematic contract will not negotiate, and is also only a problem if there is no alternative.
In many cases, there is only one choice for an operating system. If it is illegal for physicians to use that one choice, then it may be too high-risk for a physician to use computer systems for certain tasks at all.
A million in one chance should happen to three people a day in Los Angeles alone.
It would appear that the intention is for an
agent of the court to be able to evaluate the
claims for himself. Thus, it might be relevant
to specify what equipment would be required.
It would make a lot more sense if the requirement
had been for some specialized hardware, but you
might want to consider how many law offices run
[23]86's with wordperfect and novell networks, groupwise,
and so on.
"...or will recycle it."
Right... They ship it to a recycling center who
ships it guess where?
Where is this First World, anyway?
I always thought the First World referred to
Europe since the Renaissance, the New World referred
to the Americas, with the Third World being any
nonindustrialized ("developing") country.
NWN does implement some good interface ideas,
but this is not what I would call a "pie menu."
What I want to see in a pie menu is something like this:
A menu comprised of slices, where if the program
designer wants to encourage the use of a specific
function, that slice is larger and/or a lighter
color. Or if a user tends to use a menu option more,
that slice can dynamically grow larger. That way
you can establish defaults (let's say 50% of the
menu), or you can have an adaptive menu that adjusts
to the users actual usage pattern over time.
The current logitech mouse driver has the closest
thing I've seen to this type of implementation.
I wish I could dig up the Byte and DDJ articles
about pie menus from days gone by.
"Thus if the GPL is not enforceable recipients of copies of GPLd works have no right at all to create derivatives or distribute copies."
Okay, lets just say that Sigma is in violation of,
or rejects, the GPL. What laws prevent them from
shamelessly stealing the code? US copyright law?
German copyright law? If XVID prevails in this case,
will Sigma be allowed to continue their practice but
not allowed to distribute to the US market?
"After all, if you're giving the code away, you can't be economically damaged by having someone copy it. "
I am not convinced that the $0 price tag even has
to be admitted into the case.
This is a copyright violation. The unit price of
the product is irrelevant.
If the XVID software were something else, say a film
that was not yet ready for distribution. XVID hasn't
sold it to anyone yet, and they haven't even decided
whether they intend to sell it at all. Sigma takes
that film and starts screening it at theatres.
Is it relevant that XVID never sold, or never intended
to sell that film, or that they meant to broadcast it
for free? In terms of copyright infringement, it
is not at all relevant.
If I were the plaintiff in this case, I would try
to ensure that the fact that my product was distributed
for no charge was not even presented to the jury,
because it is irrelevant and because it is easily
misconstrued and distracts from the matter being judged.
The only thing that needs to be judged is whether
copyright is infringed. Before that judgement can
be made, it must be decided that Sigma was subject
to the GPL, and to US copyright law, and that they
have violated this license, or, if the license is
not valid for Sigma, that they have violated US copyright
law.
It is not clear to me at all that this German corporation
is subject to US law to any degree.
"why have they ceased development?"
If you were painting someone's house, and you
found out for certain that they had no intention
of ever paying you, would you keep painting the
house? Or would you take your ladder, your paint,
and your brush, and go elsewhere?
What if you were painting the house, and you found
out that not only were you not going to get paid,
but that the person was going to then take your ladder,
your paint, your brush, your truck, and call the police
to have you arrested for trespassing?
Would you stay and finish the job?
How would you feel about this story if the Sigma folks
had finished their product, and then turned around
and accused XVID of stealing THEIR work? Who's to
say they STILL won't try that?
"The GPL is all about encouraging code sharing, not making a profit off someone's business plan that happens to involve reselling your code."
The GPL is supposed to encourage code development
through sharing, and the way it encourages this is
to raise the possibility of whopping huge-ass bankrupting
fines for failure to comply with copyright law. Just
like the big media companies with their licenses.
It's supposed to encourage sharing WHILE PROTECTING
THE COPYRIGHT HOLDER.
Is the GPL enforcable at all in Germany?
Does the license even apply?
SpamAssassin is great and wonderful and I love it,
but it sure is a pig. SLOW. Way, way too slow.
Even on a fast box.
Any solutions?
"A few years ago I worked for a smart card company and we thought about doing this very thing. We realized very quickly, however, that the key securely stored on the smart card has to get passed out of the smart card and into software to be useable."
If you'd only patented it, you would now be in a
position to either quash the development of this
"technology" or else to collect royalties on all
media sold with your invention.
Shouldn't the plaintiff pursue a civil case against
the person who forged the letter to begin with?
Seems like a criminal charge of fraud together
with civil asset forfeiture would go a lot further
than trying to sue verisign for "65 million".
"Floppies. Asking our users to mount and unmount a floppy disk was gonna be a chore. Floppies are used a lot. That was actually gonna be a headache. Windows with its waiting for the green light to go out and then pop it out is (in theory) a better solution from a user point."
Linux has had automounters for years. In fact,
I installed RH7.3 this morning, and the automounter is enabled by default, so I didn't even have to configure it.
Not really meaning to split hairs, but the current evidence shows humans in the Western Hemisphere as early as 15,000 years ago.
Your statement of "250" years fails to take into account the period of exploration and colonization by Europeans, and totally disregards the Norse reaching Canada.
That may be how it used to work. Replace what you said about grants and scholarships with loans and you might be getting close.
These guys never heard of a cashiers' check?
They act as if taking money from Mass to Nevada
is a crime or something. I think it's just journalistic sugar, though, as it sounds just
like a quote from Midnight Express.
If you win large amounts at a casino, they matter-of-factly do the tax reporting "for you", and unless the stakes they were using were ill-gotten, there was no reason for "smuggling" it.
Leaving the country with large amounts of cash is another matter.
"You don't have to have the cash. "
The $36,000 per semester has to come from SOMEWHERE.
The "two months salary" represents only the DOWN PAYMENT on the ring. And that's gross salary, mind you.
"i don't think you can refute the taliban's involvement in the heroin industry. "
Not sure what you mean by 'refute' but one of the first things the taliban did when they took power was to crack down HARD on herion production. Opium cultivation became a capital offense under the taliban, where it was just a cash crop before.
"make sure you buy from a jeweller who shares your concerns - and they do exist."
Jewelers who get their wholesale diamonds from a source other than DeBeers... exist? Cite please.
The Inspiron's are bigger and bulkier than
the Latitudes; it's always been this way because
they bring out the newer hardware on the Inspirons
first, do the engineering to get it all on a
single board, and then release the equivalent
Latitude. If you change the video chip on a
Latitude, it's maybe interesting. Changing the
video card on an Inspiron is about as amazing as
changing the disk drive or upgrading the RAM.