Long answer: I actually think that no matter how informative and polite a letter from a lawyer is, there is always some amount of threat in it. The fact that some lawyer sends you a letter is a rather good indication that you and/or your actions has been in somebody's searchlight, which is never a good feeling. And, IMHO, lawyers ARE aware of this, and should be considerate, especially if they represent a good-will organisation, such as LMI.
quote: "Not all of the recipients were using Linux as part of their business of product/service names," he said, adding that one of the purposes of sending the letter out in the first place was to discern which organisations might use the name for commercial gain.
I am all for protecting the Linux trademark, and I (think I) understand the reasons behind it. However, I feel that LMI should really be sure that the when they send out threatening letters, the recipients ARE using Linux as part of their business/product name. Their strategy seems like harassment.
To me, this is clearly a step in the right direction. I have long been seing the rising number of debian-forks to be a problem for compability and a spreading of resources. In a DCCA world the high number of distributions would be an advantage, since each compliant distro can cater to a specific subset of users, while the community at large will still be able to cooperate cross-distro.
The fact that Ubuntu (the distro currently on my desktop) is not a member of the DCCA does not bother me very much. The whole initiative of invoking standards is the important idea. If the standard is made, I am sure Ubuntu and other non-DCCA debian forks/branches will follow suit.
Well Actually it used to be called "Personal Homepage Parser" - Just to clear things up. And we knew it wouldn't hold. It's just not recursive enough. And all names has to be recursive, like
Now if Bill had named his operating system "WINDOWS Is Not the Devil's Own Work, Sandy". It would have been a lot better.
Well, at my department (Institute of Geography, University of Copenhagen), used books usually sells at 40-80% of the original price, depending on whether it is the current edition and of course the condition of the book.
Well, I am probably even less an economist than you, forget the endless supply of ebooks (make one, make three billion, it doesn't cost anymore). It was just the one sentence that caught my eye.
If you have any books on GUI programming with GTK+/GNOME you would like to sell me, I will gladly pay you 30% of the original price.
To get back on topic:
Your sentence "You still should have the option of paying full-price for the non-limited version", IMHO hits the head of the nail; If good oldfashioned TreeWare(TM) is still available at 150% of the price of the eBook, I see no problem in having the option.
Just a side-note: The inhouse produced textbooks at my department, is usually provided free of charge on our intranet. We ARE talking about sold-at-amazon kinda books, right?
Increased demand => Lower prices? But that's unpossible!
As long as we are talking about a 33% discount it just isn't cheap enough for me to go buy a crippled book. What if you need some basic knowledge frem 2. year, when you are working on your thesis? You just have to payup again?
33% discount is (at least) what you get by reselling your book..
I really wouldn't know how this is going to be a success..
I think you are oversimplifying. To give an equally simplified example:
Givens: A Shipping costs 10,000$ to build. A competing proprietary off-the-shelf system costs 200$ A basic open source shipping systems project exists (there always is for a thing as basic as this)
Your offer to to the customer will be to install the basic system and make a few customizations, all at the same price as the competitor. You can thereby make a better (tailor-made) solution than the proprietary system.
You then donate 20% of your profits to the open source project.
Slashdot Mirror
... welcome our new satellite-destroying robotic overlords.
Short answer: Past experience. ;-)
Long answer:
I actually think that no matter how informative and polite a letter from a lawyer is, there is always some amount of threat in it. The fact that some lawyer sends you a letter is a rather good indication that you and/or your actions has been in somebody's searchlight, which is never a good feeling. And, IMHO, lawyers ARE aware of this, and should be considerate, especially if they represent a good-will organisation, such as LMI.
quote:
"Not all of the recipients were using Linux as part of their business of product/service names," he said, adding that one of the purposes of sending the letter out in the first place was to discern which organisations might use the name for commercial gain.
I am all for protecting the Linux trademark, and I (think I) understand the reasons behind it. However, I feel that LMI should really be sure that the when they send out threatening letters, the recipients ARE using Linux as part of their business/product name. Their strategy seems like harassment.
What happens if he gets sucked into a weirdo-cult? You mean, as in the F(L)OSS Community?
Gbrowser.com is already registred. :)
Seriously, just because google makes a browser, why would all other browser suddenly be obsolete?
To me, this is clearly a step in the right direction. I have long been seing the rising number of debian-forks to be a problem for compability and a spreading of resources. In a DCCA world the high number of distributions would be an advantage, since each compliant distro can cater to a specific subset of users, while the community at large will still be able to cooperate cross-distro.
The fact that Ubuntu (the distro currently on my desktop) is not a member of the DCCA does not bother me very much. The whole initiative of invoking standards is the important idea. If the standard is made, I am sure Ubuntu and other non-DCCA debian forks/branches will follow suit.
Well Actually it used to be called "Personal Homepage Parser" - Just to clear things up. And we knew it wouldn't hold. It's just not recursive enough. And all names has to be recursive, like
Now if Bill had named his operating system "WINDOWS Is Not the Devil's Own Work, Sandy". It would have been a lot better.
Well, at my department (Institute of Geography, University of Copenhagen), used books usually sells at 40-80% of the original price, depending on whether it is the current edition and of course the condition of the book. Well, I am probably even less an economist than you, forget the endless supply of ebooks (make one, make three billion, it doesn't cost anymore). It was just the one sentence that caught my eye. If you have any books on GUI programming with GTK+/GNOME you would like to sell me, I will gladly pay you 30% of the original price. To get back on topic: Your sentence "You still should have the option of paying full-price for the non-limited version", IMHO hits the head of the nail; If good oldfashioned TreeWare(TM) is still available at 150% of the price of the eBook, I see no problem in having the option. Just a side-note: The inhouse produced textbooks at my department, is usually provided free of charge on our intranet. We ARE talking about sold-at-amazon kinda books, right?
Increased demand => Lower prices? But that's unpossible!
As long as we are talking about a 33% discount it just isn't cheap enough for me to go buy a crippled book. What if you need some basic knowledge frem 2. year, when you are working on your thesis? You just have to payup again?
33% discount is (at least) what you get by reselling your book..
I really wouldn't know how this is going to be a success..
I think you are oversimplifying. To give an equally simplified example:
Givens:
A Shipping costs 10,000$ to build.
A competing proprietary off-the-shelf system costs 200$
A basic open source shipping systems project exists (there always is for a thing as basic as this)
Your offer to to the customer will be to install the basic system and make a few customizations, all at the same price as the competitor. You can thereby make a better (tailor-made) solution than the proprietary system.
You then donate 20% of your profits to the open source project.
This is the general idea, anyways...
I can just imagine the signs and barbed wire at the checkpoint:
YOU ARE ENTERING THE CANADIAN SECTOR
CARRYING WEAPONS OF DUTY FORBIDDEN
OBEY TRAFFIC RULES
VOUS ENTREZ DANS LE SECTEUR CANADIÉN
DEFENSE DE PORTER DES ARMES EN DEHORS DU SERVICE
OBÉISSEZ AUX REGLES DE CIRCULATION
DU INDTRÆDER NU I DEN CANADISKE SEKTOR
BÆRELSE AF TJENESTEVÅBEN FORBUDT
FØLG TRAFIKREGLERNE
Poor seabirds, seperated forever by world politics....
Okay - I just NEED to do this one: "In Soviet Russia, Pizza guts YOU!".
Which reminds be being pretty shocked when somebody reffered to their 25x45x50 (centimeters) CPU...