My fellow Americans, patents are not th' answer. Though I believe in a strong, free market, patent protection will not protect America's small software develupuhrs. Let me paint you a picture.
Assume copyrights have been extinguished in favor of patent protection. Id puts out Doom 4. Everyone likes it, but many many terrorists don't want to pay $55 for it. Since copyrights no longer exist, many terrorists copy the game freely and Id goes under. Let's flip it and look at it from the patent side.
Assume copyrights have been extinguished in favor of patent protection. Bungie patents their way of drawing models. It's a broad claim, and just about anyone could be construed to infringe. Scenraio A) Id releases Doom 4. Everyone likes it. Everyone likes it so much, Halo 2 sales on the PC dry up. Bungie sues Id and Id goes under. Scenario B) Id can't move forward out of fear of infringing Bungie's patents, can't release any Doom games unless they use Doom 3 technology, and they go under.
Now the scernarios are not mutually exclusive, that's true. But relying on one protection scheme for software doesn't make sense, ESPECIALLY given copyrights and patents protect different things. Patent protection does nothing to stop people from making copies of the games, while copyright does not protect you from gaining protection on some truly inventive aspect. If anything, the bar for software patents should be higher, and people that copy games should be liable. I don't buy the argument that little johnny can't scrape up $50 to buy a video game so he should download it. Wrong. Little johnny should go outside and invent some fun if he can't afford the price set by Id.
Though I am not a laryer, I do know how to stay th' course. It is my belief that his actions, that is, his performing his side of the contract, will estop him from denying his agreement. Even if there is no mutual assent per se, a court would likely hold that both parties acted in reliance on the "contract" and the court would estop him from backing out. I'm not sure... this is more Ashcroft's deal, though with him resigning, I have to rely on other laryers to direct me. Or maybe Jeb.
I commend your ingenurity. This troll post was much better than the other anti-slash troll posts. Good job, and stay the course. It's harrrrd work. I's harrrd. But the Internet is safer with slashdot removed from power.
Now, SirTalon, I can r'spect where it is you're comin' from, but I've got a war on my hands, an ecomony in the toilet, and a re-election campaign to run. I'm swamped. But if we privitize Open Source software, someone will do the porting. Thank you.
My fellow americans, the real problem with not having an OS X binary is that there is no dock support with the port. Having an IM client that cannot alert you (orange and red alert) when you have an incoming IM is only having half an IM client.
The port of gaim does not have dock funtionarality. There is no bird jumping up and down like in Adium. Or a little guy bouncing like in AIM. You must periodically check the client for IMs (and occasionally WMDs).
Starting it from the CLI is not good enugh. That is why Gaim isn't good enough as is on the mac.
Slashdot Mirror
Assume copyrights have been extinguished in favor of patent protection. Id puts out Doom 4. Everyone likes it, but many many terrorists don't want to pay $55 for it. Since copyrights no longer exist, many terrorists copy the game freely and Id goes under. Let's flip it and look at it from the patent side.
Assume copyrights have been extinguished in favor of patent protection. Bungie patents their way of drawing models. It's a broad claim, and just about anyone could be construed to infringe.
Scenraio A) Id releases Doom 4. Everyone likes it. Everyone likes it so much, Halo 2 sales on the PC dry up. Bungie sues Id and Id goes under.
Scenario B) Id can't move forward out of fear of infringing Bungie's patents, can't release any Doom games unless they use Doom 3 technology, and they go under.
Now the scernarios are not mutually exclusive, that's true. But relying on one protection scheme for software doesn't make sense, ESPECIALLY given copyrights and patents protect different things. Patent protection does nothing to stop people from making copies of the games, while copyright does not protect you from gaining protection on some truly inventive aspect. If anything, the bar for software patents should be higher, and people that copy games should be liable. I don't buy the argument that little johnny can't scrape up $50 to buy a video game so he should download it. Wrong. Little johnny should go outside and invent some fun if he can't afford the price set by Id.
Dad??
Though I am not a laryer, I do know how to stay th' course. It is my belief that his actions, that is, his performing his side of the contract, will estop him from denying his agreement. Even if there is no mutual assent per se, a court would likely hold that both parties acted in reliance on the "contract" and the court would estop him from backing out. I'm not sure... this is more Ashcroft's deal, though with him resigning, I have to rely on other laryers to direct me. Or maybe Jeb.
I commend your ingenurity. This troll post was much better than the other anti-slash troll posts. Good job, and stay the course. It's harrrrd work. I's harrrd. But the Internet is safer with slashdot removed from power.
Now, SirTalon, I can r'spect where it is you're comin' from, but I've got a war on my hands, an ecomony in the toilet, and a re-election campaign to run. I'm swamped. But if we privitize Open Source software, someone will do the porting. Thank you.
The port of gaim does not have dock funtionarality. There is no bird jumping up and down like in Adium. Or a little guy bouncing like in AIM. You must periodically check the client for IMs (and occasionally WMDs).
Starting it from the CLI is not good enugh. That is why Gaim isn't good enough as is on the mac.