>Hey idiot, trademarks don't stop other people >from using a word
Not just using a word, but using a trademark of a competitor in your sales contract, worded in such a way as to imply unfitness of the competitors' product?
If the university continued development every time around, letting students extend the software instead of starting from scratch, you might end up with something very good in a very short time.
I believe the McGill University VMS clone was something similar to this.
> The only way to stop it is to severely curtail >the amount of money that your government has to >work with.
Severely depressed economy should take care of that on its own. Let's go from recession to depression! If they can't spend because they can't tax, does approaching 100% unemployment amount to a revolution?
> Taping with consent would be a deterrent, >possibly preventing the abuse in the first >place.
Or it may stop the behavior you suspected but were unable to catch, and now it's impossible for you to ever collect evidence.
Or, it may insult the babysitter's integrity, and then she's off to a gig where she's respected, and you get to have the luck of the draw for your next babysitter.
Did Microsoft just give the FSF grounds for a suit by specifying the GNU trademark in their license, using the trade name without permission, and without acknowledgement that GNU is a trademark property of the respective trademark holder?
Well, I wouldn't mind Flash so much, but, the problem is that every time I go to a site with Flash on the main page, my browser opens up three windows (or more) to Macromedia's website, presumably to explain to me that I don't have Flash support in my browser.
This is a terribly annoying thing to go through, and it does not inspire me to do whatever would be required to make Flash work on my system (plugin from another browser platform + compatability software, run another browser, etc.)
It really just alienates me further, wastes my time, annoys me, and generally makes a bad impression on me by Macromedia.
>I don't think he ever deliberately acted >criminally; he just didn't have a clue what he >was doing.
Certain types of failures when you're running a public corporation *are* crimes.
There are plenty of situations where being in a position where you "should have known better" is enough to be charged with federal crimes.
The tax issue is a big one to me. If you, the employee, have filed w-4 forms for withholding, and the company withholds the money from your checks but doesn't pay the taxes AND YOU HAVE NO WAY TO FIND THIS OUT or to correct it, how can you be held responsible?
I think the person who did that needs to pony up the tax bill, then go to jail for 50 years.
>Unless, possibly, said books were found open, >and highlighted, on the table of said drug lab, >surrounded with the equipment and chemicals >required to make drugs.
>No doubt over time you will see microsoft try >and eliminate free software from the USA.
Yes, let them try, and try and try and try.
Let all the patents on low-hanging fruit be granted to someone NOW. In a few years, all those patents expire in the same time frame. Then, a new phase of innovation and freedom can emerge!
> If they just wanted to tinker, a Palm device >would be a far better buy - there is way more >documentation and existing code out there for >that platform.
Way more documentation for Palm than for Linux and Java? Right.
Slashdot Mirror
>Hey idiot, trademarks don't stop other people
>from using a word
Not just using a word, but using a trademark of a competitor in your sales contract, worded in such
a way as to imply unfitness of the competitors' product?
It's not a good strawman...
The tapes in these situations amount to evidence
of a crime, which is not at all what the bill is
about.
On the integrity question, though, I *am* saying that definitely I would walk out the door if my
employer decides to point a spy camera at me.
In 1/2 heartbeat. And have no qualms about explaining my action at my next interview.
>And who better to do the robbing than the
>Sherriff Davis of Nottingham himself.
You're making me wonder something.
Did I totally miss the irony of the
Robin Hood story? That the Sheriff
and Robin are one in the same?
>$95 million can buy quite a bit of programming.
I don't think it'll buy you enough programming
that you end up with something to replace Oracle.
Even if you pull it off, you risk of reimplementing patented software.
If the university continued development every
time around, letting students extend the software instead of starting from scratch, you might end up with something very good in a very short time.
I believe the McGill University VMS clone was something similar to this.
>That kind of breeding just doesn't help anyone.
Guess we've been at peace too long.
Don't you understand why governments tend to encourage and reward breeding?
Where do you think soldiers come from?
> The only way to stop it is to severely curtail
>the amount of money that your government has to
>work with.
Severely depressed economy should take care of that on its own. Let's go from recession to depression! If they can't spend because they can't tax, does approaching 100% unemployment amount to a revolution?
Did IBM kill their own business by making
drives so cheap and fast and high capacity
that the profit eroded?
Should they instead have created fast, cheap,
huge hard drive technology, patented it, then
not made the drives nor licensed the tech to
anyone else?
We could still be buying expensive 2 gig drives
just like 1994, but NO.
California bought more licenses than they need.
Maybe someone very smart has anticipated growth.
Is this one of those $700.00 hammer stories?
If he rapes your daughter instead of your wife,
will he walk while you go to jail for the kiddie-porn video tape?
> Taping with consent would be a deterrent,
>possibly preventing the abuse in the first
>place.
Or it may stop the behavior you suspected but
were unable to catch, and now it's impossible
for you to ever collect evidence.
Or, it may insult the babysitter's integrity, and
then she's off to a gig where she's respected,
and you get to have the luck of the draw for your
next babysitter.
If this license is allowed by the court,
it is now far worse for the open source developer
than before the trial!
Now there is a specific exclusion for a specific competitor. Would the contract be legal if it named a company instead of the GPL?
Did Microsoft just give the FSF grounds for a suit by specifying the GNU trademark in their license, using the trade name without permission, and without acknowledgement that GNU is a trademark property of the respective trademark holder?
Well, I wouldn't mind Flash so much, but, the problem
is that every time I go to a site with Flash on the
main page, my browser opens up three windows (or more)
to Macromedia's website, presumably to explain to me
that I don't have Flash support in my browser.
This is a terribly annoying thing to go through, and
it does not inspire me to do whatever would be required
to make Flash work on my system (plugin from another
browser platform + compatability software, run another
browser, etc.)
It really just alienates me further, wastes my time,
annoys me, and generally makes a bad impression on
me by Macromedia.
"Not Likely"
If I was an agent for RIAA represented artists,
you're damned right I'd be asking for a list,
and then demanding the share for my clients.
>I don't think he ever deliberately acted
>criminally; he just didn't have a clue what he
>was doing.
Certain types of failures when you're running
a public corporation *are* crimes.
There are plenty of situations where being in
a position where you "should have known better"
is enough to be charged with federal crimes.
The tax issue is a big one to me. If you, the employee, have filed w-4 forms for withholding,
and the company withholds the money from your checks but doesn't pay the taxes AND YOU HAVE
NO WAY TO FIND THIS OUT or to correct it, how
can you be held responsible?
I think the person who did that needs to pony up
the tax bill, then go to jail for 50 years.
>certain people in Congress seem to think that it
>is absolutely essential.
Lots of people in the US think Television is
absolutely essential to life!
They spend more time watching TV than any other
activity including sleep!
>the average motorist in Connecticut breaks 55
>about halfway down the entrance ramp.
I wonder how many accidents are caused by the road rage caused by people who obey the speed limit?
>Unless, possibly, said books were found open,
>and highlighted, on the table of said drug lab,
>surrounded with the equipment and chemicals
>required to make drugs.
Even then, it's hardly relevant!
>There's probably some people up in the
>Himalaya's that saw the thing come down and
>think its the end of the world....
>...if only they knew.
They could then claim it is an attack, and find
some low-tech, highly effective means to disrupt
and hurt the perpertrators of the attack.
>No doubt over time you will see microsoft try
>and eliminate free software from the USA.
Yes, let them try, and try and try and try.
Let all the patents on low-hanging fruit be
granted to someone NOW. In a few years, all those patents expire in the same time frame.
Then, a new phase of innovation and freedom can emerge!
>Is there any particular reason a CIFS
>implementor would have to agree to the terms of
>this license?
Absolutely!
Never touch the product! If you don't buy the product and read and agree with the license, it
does not apply to you.
The only legal protection Microsoft has are through it's patents, trademarks, and any copyright on any specific implementation.
SAMBA developer is no more subject to the terms of this license that I am.
>GPL developers can release anonymously
But they don't. And they shouldn't have to.
Asserting that you have a right but that you need to exercise that right in the closet is the same
thing as asserting that you do not have that right.
>Sharp doesn't make money off the techies that
>want to hack it though.
Oh they don't, do they?
So when I go buy my Zaurus who does get the $550?
What about all those Sharp accessories? That money doesn't go to Sharp either?
> If they just wanted to tinker, a Palm device
>would be a far better buy - there is way more
>documentation and existing code out there for
>that platform.
Way more documentation for Palm than for Linux and Java? Right.