If we had to build one of these, get a really powerful wireless connection (something that would transmit from space) and hosted MP3's on it...no one would be able to bring it down...or maybe Bush could use this as an excuse to resurect the star wars program, this time funded by sony and all the other record companies, instead of the tax payers money, it might just get off the ground. Who said that mp3's wouldnt make the world a better place?
Apologies for not being clear in my original post, I did understand the fact that the back ups are being held on to "Frank". What I was trying to get through though is the legal implications of this, why can he hold on to the content if it doesnt belong to him, sure the media that the backups are on belong to him, but not the content right?, So in short, my question is if these designs are covered by the GPL (not sure if they were) Does the license have any clause that can sort out cases like this?
If you guys read the statement, you will understand that the site is not down because of technical difficulties, but of because of "A Lazy Owner" and bickering
between the volunteers,
If they don't want to bother bringing the site back down, the least they could do is to distribute the content, so that other people can host it themselves. After the all the website belongs to them, but the content doesnt.
Slashdot Mirror
Aaaah, but you owe money,The estimated population of the United States is 297,723,317 so each citizen's share of this debt is $27,194.36.[www.brillig.com] dont make us go there and break your knees...lol
If we had to build one of these, get a really powerful wireless connection (something that would transmit from space) and hosted MP3's on it...no one would be able to bring it down...or maybe Bush could use this as an excuse to resurect the star wars program, this time funded by sony and all the other record companies, instead of the tax payers money, it might just get off the ground. Who said that mp3's wouldnt make the world a better place?
Lol, ill keep that in mind
Thats all very good, but will it run linux?. Umm, nevermind :)
Apologies for not being clear in my original post, I did understand the fact that the back ups are being held on to "Frank". What I was trying to get through though is the legal implications of this, why can he hold on to the content if it doesnt belong to him, sure the media that the backups are on belong to him, but not the content right?, So in short, my question is if these designs are covered by the GPL (not sure if they were) Does the license have any clause that can sort out cases like this?
If you guys read the statement, you will understand that the site is not down because of technical difficulties, but of because of "A Lazy Owner" and bickering between the volunteers, If they don't want to bother bringing the site back down, the least they could do is to distribute the content, so that other people can host it themselves. After the all the website belongs to them, but the content doesnt.