"AT&T also said an open-access network would deprive taxpayers of billions of dollars, and inhibit the growth of wireless broadband in the country."
Isn't that sentence wrong?
Shouldn't that say, "...would deprive the government of taxpayers money"? As far as I know, the U.S. Government is very good at depriving the taxpayers of billions of dollars and showing nothing for it. Unless you count the Robert Byrd Memorial Camp Ground as something worthwhile.
And, you point out a problem that is going to take this off topic, but I'm up for the challenge.
M A R K E T I N G
When it comes to getting the word out, OSS projects really hurt themselves.
Marketing in OSS falls into some basic categories:
Non-existant - If the word doesn't get it, it doesn't get out, and marketing to geeks is not always the best way to get the word out, its called "Preaching to the Choir"
Anti-Marketing - "My Grandmother could recompile...", "RTFM you lamer", "Seriously, the command-line is not confusing and its the best UI. Oh, you forgot 3 very important switches and the 2 you used are mutually exclusive, lamer"
Activist - "By installing and using OSS you will bring GNU/Social GNU/Justice to the GNU/World. Now, face Berkely and Pray to the GNU/Prophey, RMS, All Holiness to His Name."
What are people so afraid of? The test must be had to cement it. Or, are people so afraid that GPL won't stand that they will come up with arguments why it shouldn't stand?
The point is that the GPL is so obviously-enforceable, that there is no need to test it.
Do you realize how stupid that just sounded:
The FACT that God exists is so obvious, there is no need to prove otherwise
Global warming is so obviously human caused, there is no further need of science to prove it
Linux is so obviously secure, we don't need test it
I can ovbiously speel, I don't ned a spelczecher
Unless a contract, a license, or other document has stood up under court testing, it will remain in question until it has been tested. Until then, your pronouncement should remain a statement of faith and not fact, keeping in mind, dogma != fact.
Fighting the GPL would mean arguing that you voluntarily accepted its terms (how else did you get the right to modify / distribute), got extra options without any payment or anything in return - but still you're not actually bound by those terms. Good luck.
Nice sentiment but I'd like to see it tested in court. Related, but different, those that thought the "shrinkwrap" license was rock solid found out otherwise.
I think "the lawyers" need to find a good solid case to take to court. They need to stop accepting settlements and agreements, at least once, to firmly establish their position. Otherwise, they may find themselves in the position of being considered shakedown artists in the same vein as the RIAA, MPAA, Jesse Jackson, and Al Sharpton. Or, they run the risk of being accused of settling easy to avoid a potentially damaging judgement.
A quick Google search revealed that yes, it has gone to court and won.
O.k., to simplify what I read, a company placed their open development under GPL and the SAE wanted it closed so they could charge fees. Further they said it was derivitive of their owned work. The company won against the SAE. I don't see this as the test. It is a test, and an important baby step to the full test, but still not the difinitive one.
Is there one where Company A releases code under GPL, Company B releases a derived project under a closed license and the case went to court?
What I don't understand, why aren't people reading their own comments (proof-reading there words, it's common in written speech)?
Oh, the F*cking irony. "There" or "their"? Right in one place, wrong in the other, unless you were making a left-handed approach to a Mel Brooks routine. "Where words? There words.")
There is no "before".
There has to be a big bang to have a "before big bang".
Now, 6000 years ago, roughly, God spoke and the Universe lept into being.
All you techno-geeks need to accept that. Put away your computers. I have. I stopped using computers because they are the "Beast" (Beast is a Trademark of the RMS Corporation, a wholly, and holy, owned subsidary of FOSS, owners of the GNUniverse).
God will smite you computer using disbelievers for not accepting the 6000 year Universe. Your only salvation is to face Kentucky and believe.
Modded Troll? Wow, some blockhead took me seriously. He went looking for a Christian Nut Job, fired his wad, and spent his mod points all on a joke. Meanwhile, there really is a CNJ running around saying, "There is no before..." and meaning it.
Or, did the moderator not like my Kentucky joke?
Or, was he an RMS, all holiness to his name, Accolyte thinking I was making GNUFun of the Prophet?
In 10 years, this will be on the desktop, everyone will yawn because we have been boiled frogs and it won't impress us then. In 10 years, you'll look at someones tie clasp computer and say, "Wow, I remember when that took up an 8 by 18 block of my desk."
In 10 years, DARPA will announce the shut down of the Quantum Computing Project because it will be discovered that every time Red Hat Mandriva Winux OS/Q green screens, a parallel universe winks out of existance.
In 10 years, they'll slap wheels on your grandmother's behind and call her a wagon.
There has to be a big bang to have a "before big bang".
Now, 6000 years ago, roughly, God spoke and the Universe lept into being.
All you techno-geeks need to accept that. Put away your computers. I have. I stopped using computers because they are the "Beast" (Beast is a Trademark of the RMS Corporation, a wholly, and holy, owned subsidary of FOSS, owners of the GNUniverse).
God will smite you computer using disbelievers for not accepting the 6000 year Universe. Your only salvation is to face Kentucky and believe.
I think I've just come up with a new money making scheme!
1) Goto shop
Wow, old habits die hard. GOTO? How about:
10 LET STEP1$ = "Go to shop and purchase large amounts of rubber duckies
20 LET STEP2$ = "Emerse them in water and ice for a few years and so"
30 LET STEP3$ = "Sell them to this company for 50 pounds each"
40 GOTO 1000
1000 REM Profit Routine
1010...
Re:Holiness Unto the Prophet
on
GPLv3 Released
·
· Score: 1
HERESY!!!
Re:Holiness Unto the Prophet
on
GPLv3 Released
·
· Score: 1, Troll
Please, allow me to correct you, you apostate sectarian:
GNU/Sainthood in the GNU/Church of Emacs requires living a GNU/life of GNU/purity--but in the GNU/Church of Emacs, this does not require GNU/celibacy (a sigh of relief is heard). Being GNU/holy in our GNU/church means installing a wholly GNU/free GNU/operating GNU/system--GNU/Linux is a good choice--and not putting any non-free software on your computer. Join the GNU/Church of Emacs, and you too can be a GNU/saint!
The GNU/Holy Writ proclaims that you are GNU/Free to accept the Prophet's, Holiness Issues From His Orifices, version of GNU/Freedom. That is, you become GNU/Free from GNU/Choice.
Jihad on apostates and infidels.
Holiness Unto the Prophet
on
GPLv3 Released
·
· Score: 2, Funny
There is no God but FOSS and Stallman is its Prophet. Peace be upon him. The writ of holy scripture GPL shall burn into the souls of the infidel. If they do not submit, as the Prophet, holiness is his name, to the will of God, then we will force governments to ban the infidels. We will use the holy war of antitrust on the infidel. God wills it, we are the followers of God and its Prophet, paradise awaits him.
Or, perhaps, like in science, they discovered a flaw in their own methodology that rendered the presentation pointless. It does happen. How many times has someone yelled eureka, only to have some genius say, "Uh, Bob, you still have the machine plugged into the grid, it's not under its own power"?
Slashdot Mirror
Isn't that sentence wrong?
Shouldn't that say, "...would deprive the government of taxpayers money"? As far as I know, the U.S. Government is very good at depriving the taxpayers of billions of dollars and showing nothing for it. Unless you count the Robert Byrd Memorial Camp Ground as something worthwhile.
Yeah, because they didn't seem heartless regarding Tianemen, or during the Tibet take over, or in killing Falun Gong members, or...
Heartless is as heartless does.
And, you point out a problem that is going to take this off topic, but I'm up for the challenge.
M A R K E T I N G
When it comes to getting the word out, OSS projects really hurt themselves.
Marketing in OSS falls into some basic categories:
At least Sun got it right.
You're still driving a '62 Plymouth Valiant, complete with sagging headliner, right?
Funny you should say that, thats what I was saying.
The sound of jets whizzing over your head must really bug you.
Rather than complain about MS alternative to open docs, respond with a plug in that will allow MS users to choose.
This is the way to do it.
I'm sorry, OpenOffice guys, but compared to MS Office, your product is so 1995.
What the OSS groups need to do is embrace and extend and borgify MS until all the MS tools are extensions of the movement.
Nice absurd strawman. You fail.
What are people so afraid of? The test must be had to cement it. Or, are people so afraid that GPL won't stand that they will come up with arguments why it shouldn't stand?
Do you realize how stupid that just sounded:
Unless a contract, a license, or other document has stood up under court testing, it will remain in question until it has been tested. Until then, your pronouncement should remain a statement of faith and not fact, keeping in mind, dogma != fact.
Nice, but until the court actually does it to them, it's like a prom date promising a great time after the dance. That's all it is, a promise.
To combine with another comment: the SCO v. IBM thing might be promising, but then again, if they settle, there has been no test of fire.
Nice sentiment but I'd like to see it tested in court. Related, but different, those that thought the "shrinkwrap" license was rock solid found out otherwise.
I think "the lawyers" need to find a good solid case to take to court. They need to stop accepting settlements and agreements, at least once, to firmly establish their position. Otherwise, they may find themselves in the position of being considered shakedown artists in the same vein as the RIAA, MPAA, Jesse Jackson, and Al Sharpton. Or, they run the risk of being accused of settling easy to avoid a potentially damaging judgement.
It has to be tested.
O.k., to simplify what I read, a company placed their open development under GPL and the SAE wanted it closed so they could charge fees. Further they said it was derivitive of their owned work. The company won against the SAE. I don't see this as the test. It is a test, and an important baby step to the full test, but still not the difinitive one.
Is there one where Company A releases code under GPL, Company B releases a derived project under a closed license and the case went to court?
Serious question here:
Has there been any successful court action enforcing any version of the GPL?
Not settlements. I'm talking about an instance where a court in the U.S. has upheld GPL against a violator.
Oh, the F*cking irony. "There" or "their"? Right in one place, wrong in the other, unless you were making a left-handed approach to a Mel Brooks routine. "Where words? There words.")
Hey, next time, just let it go, Doofus.
You need a drink. Sacramental whine anyone?
You can run Vista, with most of the features turned off.
Modded Troll? Wow, some blockhead took me seriously. He went looking for a Christian Nut Job, fired his wad, and spent his mod points all on a joke. Meanwhile, there really is a CNJ running around saying, "There is no before..." and meaning it.
Or, did the moderator not like my Kentucky joke?
Or, was he an RMS, all holiness to his name, Accolyte thinking I was making GNUFun of the Prophet?
In 10 years, this will be on the desktop, everyone will yawn because we have been boiled frogs and it won't impress us then. In 10 years, you'll look at someones tie clasp computer and say, "Wow, I remember when that took up an 8 by 18 block of my desk."
In 10 years, DARPA will announce the shut down of the Quantum Computing Project because it will be discovered that every time Red Hat Mandriva Winux OS/Q green screens, a parallel universe winks out of existance.
In 10 years, they'll slap wheels on your grandmother's behind and call her a wagon.
Imagine a Beowulf cluster of these.
But, does it run Linux.
In Soviet Russia NCSA Looks Inside of You.
There is no "before".
There has to be a big bang to have a "before big bang".
Now, 6000 years ago, roughly, God spoke and the Universe lept into being.
All you techno-geeks need to accept that. Put away your computers. I have. I stopped using computers because they are the "Beast" (Beast is a Trademark of the RMS Corporation, a wholly, and holy, owned subsidary of FOSS, owners of the GNUniverse).
God will smite you computer using disbelievers for not accepting the 6000 year Universe. Your only salvation is to face Kentucky and believe.
Wow, old habits die hard. GOTO? How about: ...
10 LET STEP1$ = "Go to shop and purchase large amounts of rubber duckies
20 LET STEP2$ = "Emerse them in water and ice for a few years and so"
30 LET STEP3$ = "Sell them to this company for 50 pounds each"
40 GOTO 1000
1000 REM Profit Routine
1010
HERESY!!!
Please, allow me to correct you, you apostate sectarian:
GNU/Sainthood in the GNU/Church of Emacs requires living a GNU/life of GNU/purity--but in the GNU/Church of Emacs, this does not require GNU/celibacy (a sigh of relief is heard). Being GNU/holy in our GNU/church means installing a wholly GNU/free GNU/operating GNU/system--GNU/Linux is a good choice--and not putting any non-free software on your computer. Join the GNU/Church of Emacs, and you too can be a GNU/saint!
The GNU/Holy Writ proclaims that you are GNU/Free to accept the Prophet's, Holiness Issues From His Orifices, version of GNU/Freedom. That is, you become GNU/Free from GNU/Choice.
Jihad on apostates and infidels.
There is no God but FOSS and Stallman is its Prophet. Peace be upon him. The writ of holy scripture GPL shall burn into the souls of the infidel. If they do not submit, as the Prophet, holiness is his name, to the will of God, then we will force governments to ban the infidels. We will use the holy war of antitrust on the infidel. God wills it, we are the followers of God and its Prophet, paradise awaits him.
There is not God but FOSS.
Stallman is its Prophet.
The Holy Writ of God is GPL.
Also in the news:
It's marketing, folks. You give away something for free, they get hooked, they buy more. Prince has always been good with the business end.
Or, perhaps, like in science, they discovered a flaw in their own methodology that rendered the presentation pointless. It does happen. How many times has someone yelled eureka, only to have some genius say, "Uh, Bob, you still have the machine plugged into the grid, it's not under its own power"?