And if you found a startup company, Microsoft will happily give you a free MSDN Premium subscription, with production licenses of the server products, provided you meet a few criteria (i.e. if you're an outsourcing firm, piss off. If you earn more than $1M per year, piss off. If you have a large corporate owner, piss off) and agree to pay an exit fee at the end of the program.
That's nice, but it's still Spyglass that got screwed, not Netscape. Spyglass is the one Microsoft licensed Mosaic off for a percentage of the profits in royalties, then gave it away free (apparently 10% of 0 is 0. Who knew?!?)
And I don't trust Groklaw as far as I can kick it. It's about as objective as "Get the Facts on Windows Server 2003 vs Linux (sponsored by Microsoft)".
As for the expert system... well, you give something away you can hardly complain when someone uses it. It's pretty common for software makers to claim to be able to control the use of their product after sale, but IMO such claims are bogus whether the software was sold or given away. Copyright law doesn't control use, so assuming the consultant was merely using the system, and not redistributing it, he was in the clear.
So long as the "consulting firm" isn't trying to claim authorship, anyway. Pretty sure that US law protects the right to creative acknowledgment, right?
Actually, there's zero chance for them to modify the paperless document. The auditing is just in way too many places for them to reasonably be able to pull it off. I know someone who left here to work at a bank, and he often complained of the security requirements there - an RSA keyfob is required to even access a server (which is done by moving your PC to a separate VLAN or something similar) and you only get half an hour before the security system boots you. Then there's the auditing. Oh, the auditing. Hell, the audit logs are probably "write once, modify never" type things.
Not to mention modifying that sort of stuff would be highly illegal and get you investigated by some pretty high up organisations.
I don't know. But here in NZ, one site alone accounts for apparently 90% of all web site visits.
Also, you said 2.5% of all US traffic. This is not what the article (or summary) said - they said Craigslist accounts for 2.5% of all US web site visits.
Your "and" is quite misleading there. Looking at that page, they recommend you not use any license that is incompatible with the GNU equivalents - and that even includes licenses which are more free than GNU versions.
Still, GP is right. The FSF does indeed say that Ms-PL is a "free software" license. The fact that they also say "don't use it because it's not compatible with GPL (like everything fucking else!)" is not really relevant.
I've never seen you, and this comment gave me an image of a fellow in a black suit with a briefcase laughing maniacally.
Frightening, it is.
I'm surprised no one tried "In a surprising twist of irony, renowned lawyer Ray Beckerman has taken on a role with the Recording Industry Association of America as chief litigator".
Actually, Apple screens ARE Dell screens - though Apple still only uses the high-end version. And "UltraSharp TrueLife" is Dell's way of saying "Hi-Resolution Glossy" (sound familiar?)
What, you thought Apple MADE these things? Nope, Apple MacBooks are nothing more than standard OEM parts assembled by none other than AsusTek.
Actually, no. I think HP is the worst. If Apple is really reselling Crucial, and it's roughly the same price as HP, then HP can be safely assumed to have marked up more since HP RAM is usually Hynix or other cheap brands (used to be Kingston).
Actually, Mono should be safe - since any open-sourceish stuff that Microsoft offers is under a pretty strict irrevocable license (unless you violate it). And since it has patent immunity clauses like GPL3...
We believe in strength through unity, and we think our community's unity in the face of these threats has helped to bring about Microsoft's quick settlement on all issues with TomTom.
Really, SFLC? A little full of ourselves are we? If anything, Microsoft's incredible financial arsenal bought about TomTom's quick settlement on all issues with Microsoft!
I'd mod this insightful if I hadn't just run out of points. Seriously, why does everyone on this site equate Microsoft with Evil and Linux with Good, as if there is some war transcending time and space between the two?
Any company that is considering threatening Microsoft with patent infringement suits will be re-evaluating that threat. TomTom clearly are run by idiots, otherwise TomTom would not have threatened Microsoft in the first place. So the question for other companies that plan to threaten Microsoft is whether fighting Microsoft in court will cost them more than simply not threatening Microsoft in the first place.
Absolutely! Windows is specifically designed so that you can do that sort of thing. They're called Installable Filesystem Drivers (IFS in the 9x series - though they can be done for NT as well).
What do you mean "untrusted device" - have you ever seen the requirements for certification to swipe credit cards - the keypad has to freaking AES encrypt your PIN number before even sending it to the card/terminal (depending on whether you're using chip or strip cards)
Slashdot Mirror
To be blunt, his English is better than most people's English.
And if you found a startup company, Microsoft will happily give you a free MSDN Premium subscription, with production licenses of the server products, provided you meet a few criteria (i.e. if you're an outsourcing firm, piss off. If you earn more than $1M per year, piss off. If you have a large corporate owner, piss off) and agree to pay an exit fee at the end of the program.
That's nice, but it's still Spyglass that got screwed, not Netscape. Spyglass is the one Microsoft licensed Mosaic off for a percentage of the profits in royalties, then gave it away free (apparently 10% of 0 is 0. Who knew?!?)
And I don't trust Groklaw as far as I can kick it. It's about as objective as "Get the Facts on Windows Server 2003 vs Linux (sponsored by Microsoft)".
We're not Australia, idiot.
Trademe. It's like eBay, for New Zealanders!
As for the expert system... well, you give something away you can hardly complain when someone uses it. It's pretty common for software makers to claim to be able to control the use of their product after sale, but IMO such claims are bogus whether the software was sold or given away. Copyright law doesn't control use, so assuming the consultant was merely using the system, and not redistributing it, he was in the clear.
So long as the "consulting firm" isn't trying to claim authorship, anyway. Pretty sure that US law protects the right to creative acknowledgment, right?
Not Netscape, Spyglass. Spyglass got screwed, not Netscape.
Actually, there's zero chance for them to modify the paperless document. The auditing is just in way too many places for them to reasonably be able to pull it off. I know someone who left here to work at a bank, and he often complained of the security requirements there - an RSA keyfob is required to even access a server (which is done by moving your PC to a separate VLAN or something similar) and you only get half an hour before the security system boots you. Then there's the auditing. Oh, the auditing. Hell, the audit logs are probably "write once, modify never" type things.
Not to mention modifying that sort of stuff would be highly illegal and get you investigated by some pretty high up organisations.
I don't know. But here in NZ, one site alone accounts for apparently 90% of all web site visits.
Also, you said 2.5% of all US traffic. This is not what the article (or summary) said - they said Craigslist accounts for 2.5% of all US web site visits.
Your "and" is quite misleading there. Looking at that page, they recommend you not use any license that is incompatible with the GNU equivalents - and that even includes licenses which are more free than GNU versions.
Still, GP is right. The FSF does indeed say that Ms-PL is a "free software" license. The fact that they also say "don't use it because it's not compatible with GPL (like everything fucking else!)" is not really relevant.
I've never seen you, and this comment gave me an image of a fellow in a black suit with a briefcase laughing maniacally.
Frightening, it is.
I'm surprised no one tried "In a surprising twist of irony, renowned lawyer Ray Beckerman has taken on a role with the Recording Industry Association of America as chief litigator".
Holy crap, that (troll?) was funnier than the article!
Wrong on sooo many counts.
The Dell doesn't have Bluetooth, but it can. The Wireless is an INTEGRATED card (does not consume a slot at all).
The Dell has that you claim it doesn't:
The Dell has and the Mac doesn't have:
Actually, Apple screens ARE Dell screens - though Apple still only uses the high-end version. And "UltraSharp TrueLife" is Dell's way of saying "Hi-Resolution Glossy" (sound familiar?)
What, you thought Apple MADE these things? Nope, Apple MacBooks are nothing more than standard OEM parts assembled by none other than AsusTek.
Actually, no. I think HP is the worst. If Apple is really reselling Crucial, and it's roughly the same price as HP, then HP can be safely assumed to have marked up more since HP RAM is usually Hynix or other cheap brands (used to be Kingston).
Banks don't care? Not liable?
Wow, your country really does have it bad. Over here, the banks take full responsibility for ATM fraud, and they even cover online banking!
Actually, Mono should be safe - since any open-sourceish stuff that Microsoft offers is under a pretty strict irrevocable license (unless you violate it). And since it has patent immunity clauses like GPL3...
We believe in strength through unity, and we think our community's unity in the face of these threats has helped to bring about Microsoft's quick settlement on all issues with TomTom.
Really, SFLC? A little full of ourselves are we? If anything, Microsoft's incredible financial arsenal bought about TomTom's quick settlement on all issues with Microsoft!
I'd mod this insightful if I hadn't just run out of points. Seriously, why does everyone on this site equate Microsoft with Evil and Linux with Good, as if there is some war transcending time and space between the two?
Any company that is considering threatening Microsoft with patent infringement suits will be re-evaluating that threat. TomTom clearly are run by idiots, otherwise TomTom would not have threatened Microsoft in the first place. So the question for other companies that plan to threaten Microsoft is whether fighting Microsoft in court will cost them more than simply not threatening Microsoft in the first place.
PTP is for pictures. MTP is for movies and music. You're not meant to use MTP or PTP for anything other than what they're designed for.
Though really, the question is "what's the base standard for PTP and MTP?"
Absolutely! Windows is specifically designed so that you can do that sort of thing. They're called Installable Filesystem Drivers (IFS in the 9x series - though they can be done for NT as well).
Uh, modern Linux wont boot off FAT filesystems anyway, last I saw. So the Linux partition is likely an EXT2 or EXT3 mounted separately.
It's the long filename support (which came with 95) that they patented. Not FAT itself.
What do you mean "untrusted device" - have you ever seen the requirements for certification to swipe credit cards - the keypad has to freaking AES encrypt your PIN number before even sending it to the card/terminal (depending on whether you're using chip or strip cards)