You can be sure that the contract (if there is one) is under the jurisdiction of russian law, not US law.
Like I said in my post, if US citizens are involved, then they are liable, perhaps, but the russian entity is not.
As to the slightly off topic...
There is no good legal system. The US system is so backlogged and so top heavy its insane.
Remember that case where the women spilled hot coffee on herself and sued (I think it was mcdonalds), so now they have to put warnings on their coffee cups that say hot. How stupid are you if you don't know that coffee is hot. Come on.
I think that the criminal system is reasonable, however, your civil system is so out of wack. Everybody is looking for a free lunch at the expense of Corporate America.
Geeze, look at all those guys who sit on patents, and then wait for somebody to invent something similar and then take them to court. Reality is, it's often cheaper to settle rather than go through the courts and hold up business.
I agree with the plaintiff paying all court and legal costs, that would help a lot. Better yet, make the law firms pay for it. That would solve the problems for sure.
OH man, I don't even know where to start.
OK, lets sum this up.
1. US law has nothing to do with "international law". International law consists of treaties. Only treaties signed by states is "binding" on that particular state. The WTO is not an organization based on US law.
2. In terms of international law, each body is a sovereign state, and is completely independent and free to do what it wants except as bound by the treaties that it is a signatore to. (Get it?)
3. Civil suits within the bounds of a sovereign state. DO NOT fall under the jurisdiction of the WTO. Think about it, would any country want the WTO coming in and saying, "we don't like your judgement in this case, so we are over ruling it.". The key here is sovereign.
Why is the RIAA trying to sue someone in another country. The US has no jurisdiction.
Does the site have a presence in the US? Well? If it doesn't then they can get bent. Now they can go after all the people who paid the site to download songs, but not the site in Russia.
Please America, don't try to bring your horrible legal system to the rest of the world. We don't want it.
Or maybe people with a good out look on life just don't whine and complain as much. Maybe to happy people a little sniffle isn't as noticable as someone who is always complaining about things.
It's like those people who look outside, see 2 flakes of snow and call into work saying they can't come in because it's snowing. "Oh, so your taking a vacation day??" OK, I'll be in on time. Sigh.
Hey, it's great to have a judge and an international legislator posting to slash dot. Since your opinion of what makes a crime is so relevent then it must be true.
Might doesn't make right, this is true, but might sure as hell makes it happen. If you are some nobody with nothing, that is what you get accomplished. Anything else is, in my opinion, naive.
Having a monopoly isn't a crime. Having an oligopoly isn't a crime either.
As for the neighbour kicking the crap out of you, no that is true, but if you have money, and you want to, you can torment him in ways far worse than a crap beating.
The golden rule. He who has the gold, makes the rules.
Microsoft has an Agenda. Ultimately, this agenda is to sell product and make money for the shareholders.
It's no different than any other corporation except it has become extremely successful, and has not exercised the highest standards of business practices. However, given the nature of the business, it's not doing anything that any other corporation would not do. Using all it's resources to be the most profitable it fan be.
I also think that a lot of people bash Microsoft because it's easy, and because they sound smart doing it. It's easy to sound smart when you are saying why things are bad. The more forceful you sound, the more reaasonable your argument. Most people don't understand/know/care enough to refute the argument.
Other people think that MS charges too much for product. Well, if you don't like it don't buy it. It's not my fault your on welfare.
Oh wow is me, I am too stupid to realize that I am stealing, and poor me, someone else should pay for me when I make a mistake.
It's my right to avoid my problems by suing other people, it's my parents fault,and my teacher's fault, and the governments fault, and my neighbours fault, and...well just everybody but me.
Once again, I am too stupid to know that getting free music is stealing.
/
Come on, you do the crime you do the time. Suck it up, and suffer.
I run a business with 15 people. We are classified a small business,but we are on the large side of that.
I have an IT budget of $20,000 a year for office computers.
Pretty generous I think.
So I either buy new machines and put Vista on them, and office 2007, and go over my budget, or I can just sit with what I have now, and avoid all the training and hardship associated with it.
I'm sure have the software we wrote in Visual Basic 6.0 will break and I'll have to spend weeks making it work. But I'm just not interested in all the extra work.
They will have to drag me kicking and screaming towards Vista, it'll be like that Arnie movie where his head nearly explodes in low air pressure on the surface of Mars.
Like your US President says "Ain't gonna do it."
I see people writing about the evils of DRM and the heart of the problem is that if people didn't copy music and everybody paid for what they enjoyed, there would be no need for DRM, so, realistically, it's our own fault that DRM is needed.
There are all sorts of excuses out there about why people copy music. There are so few good CDs out there, the artists make enough money, the studios are ripping people off. Obviously there are so many more, but here's the thing. The artists worked to produce that album, the producers took a risk to produce that album. Damn people, no one expects you to work for free, and to give away your life's blood for free, so why should artists do it for free?? They have families to support, and lives to live just like everybody else, so what is the problem?
Having said that, I don't like the RIAAs heavy handed tactics and draconian tactics when it comes to enforcing their views on everybody. I don't like how the studios are ruining the new HDDVD standards, and I think it has great potential to ruin the new formats.
But here's the thing people, we have no one to blame but ourselves.
Yeah, I know, but its so hard to listen to new music these days.
The radio is just so annoying (as posted by others). I am looking at XM, and I already have a receiver in my car, but I just haven't signed up. Subscriptions to things just don't sit right with me.
Anyway, I know I should be a good Canadian and listen to good music, but even the last album from The Hip didn't tickle my fancy, and dammit, I live in Kingston, and my business partner is neighbors with one of the guys in the band.
It just isn't enough.
I love music, I have a huge CD Collection, but recently I have not been purchasing too many CDs.
This last couple of months I bought 3 CDs.
The new Barenaked Ladies CD, the new Blue Rodeo Album, and a classic Bruce Springsteen album.
Well...
The new barenaked ladies I listed to once, and put away. Same with the Blue Rodeo Album (not a good effort Mr. Cuddy). The classic Bruce Springsteen was just great.
I can point to several CDs by the Barenaked Ladies and Blue Rodeo that were incredibly.
So why would I buy CDs that I'm going to listen to once? I'm just going to continue to listen to the albums published years ago that were great, and are still great.
As for the new stuff, I'm going to listen to it on the radio, and in the unlikely event that some great music appears, I will buy it.
That is why music sales are down, I think, people just are getting tired of crap.
I hate to say it, but from a Canadian perspective, Canadian Content should be more concerned with the content than the Canadian.
OK so re-reading my article it does sound like I am ignoring what the nurses and the dieticians are saying, but that is not what I meant to say.
What I was getting at was that everybody has a vested interest in keeping their jobs. For instance, the nurse says, "well you should come and see the nurse every week". What? Why? I test my blood sugar twice a day. I eat the right foods, I eat in moderation (regardless of my comments about steaks).
I'm not looking for sympathy about anything wrong with me. I am dealing with it just fine thanks very much. Like I said, it's a family thing, and I knew it was coming.
And as for the seminars, they were complete crap. I found out much more researching the web. Maybe other people find it useful, but for me it wasn't. Maybe I was to well prepared going into the seminar.
Why are you saying I haven't recognized it. I quite plainly have, and I have made many changes to reflect the diabetes. Don't assume things I'm not saying.
Finally, if you take medical advice from/. then you deserve what you get.
I know that exercise is the most important thing. I am SOOO lazy, and it is definitely a life style change.
I think what pisses me the most is they say don't eat anything with fat or carbs. I know this is to get the weight down, and I have lost a fair bit of weight, still got some to go, but much better. The fat and the carbs has nothing to do with the sugar, that's glucose and fructose, right?
I understand the concept of keeping my weight down, and I'm working on that. The nurses don't say why they want you to do something, just to do it. Most of the people in my group were writing everything she said like it was a prophesy from an Eddings novel.
They said inspect your feet, but not what for. Geeze. Anyway, I definitely have no interest in a slow painful death. I want to go out as an 80 year old coot in a Carrera GT with a 20 year old blonde bimbo beside me.
All I hear today is, don't eat this, don't eat that, don't eat the other.
I recently found I have diabetes type 2. Thats the one where you have to watch your diet and take some metformin and other drugs (maybe), and exercise. (BLAH). Boo hoo for me, my Dad has it, my Grandfather on my mom's side, I'd be a little stupid if I wasn't expecting it. In any case, I went to these "Diabetes seminars" put on by the local hospital. There is a nurse, and she talks about how to take care of yourself. Lots of fliers, and basically, she says, don't eat this don't eat that, all the stuff I like. 3 days of seminars, and I have to go visit the nurse and do this and that and the other.
Eventually I figure out that this is just go generate easy money for the hospital. They are billing the province a huge amount for each seminar and visits, so I said screw it. Now I just do it myself and everything is fine.
Where am I going with this tho? Thanks for asking. Everybody is saying this is bad for you, that is bad for you. Oh, don't drink milk, it causes cancer. Don't eat peanut butter at school, people have allergy's. Freakin peanut butter, I grew up on that. Something is always bad for you. You have to eat something. I'll be damned if I'm going to spend my life eating rabbit food. Screw that.
So they are cloning my steaks now. Sometimes I find a really good tbone at the butcher, sometimes it's not so good. I would love to find one that I like, and clone that over and over again. Give me another a1j447L2K please. Perfect every time. Whew hew.
Let's not forget that every time somebody says something is bad for you, there is an agenda behind it. Pepsi says Coke is bad for you. Coke says Pepsi is bad for you. Milk marketers say juice is bad for you. The government wants you to know smoking is bad for you because it is a huge burdon on the health industry. (Well, it is bad for you, duh!).
It drives me crazy everybody telling me what to eat and what to drink. I'll do what I want.
It seems to me that lately the large players in the AV world (Norton, McAfee) have been trying so hard to differentiate their product from standard Microsoft offerings (i.e. add value to their products) that the cost/benefit of having one of the major player products is not good. We had a 20 or so copies of NAV 2005 (or maybe it was 2004) and we ordered them through Ingram Micro and we got the licences. So we installed the licences, and then a couple of weeks later they would need to be activated (again) but wouldn't accept the #. So after a month or so of this we scrapped the norton product, went to AVG and have had no problems since. So the moral of the story is that the large players are trying so hard to show that you HAVE TO have their product, and to make sure that you pay for it, that it is not a usable product, IMHO.
Heheh, my sister was hot, my buddies told me. I just didn't see it myself. Of course, they weren't in the bathtub with her one time (OK we were 3 and 2 years old) and she dropped a log. Definitely not hot.:)
My sister is one of those people who thinks of welfare as a career. She got that attitude from hanging out with other people who have that attitude. She got it in high school, going to a "trade" high school for less gifted students (AKA dumping grounds). She took classes like hair dressing, english and reading (this is high school folks).
In any case, she dropped out with a baby and went on welfare (loser boyfriend = no choice).
She never did get of welfare until she got married 15 years later. Now her husband is on workman's comp for a back injury, and he will never work again.
So the long and short of this story, one night I was sitting around with one of her friends, and we were having an argument about working.
I told her she should get a job and get of welfare. She told me she has a job, she has kids and raises them. It's not a job. It's a life choice, but since your other halves don't want to support you, it's not a good choice, and being on welfare is never a job.
she never spoke to me again, my loss, she was a hottie.
Its another step backwards for the US legal system.
The lawyers and their "cut of the winnings" style of payment is disabling the United States.
I read a case once where someone tried to help someone, and was sued for it because they didn't do a good job. The moral of the story? Don't help anyone. Ever. Great.
So if I have the facts right, some lady complained about services provided by another company and was awarded damages? Was what she said right? If it was right, why was she sued? If it wasn't right, then sure no problem, but if she was right. And 11 million dollars? What?????????????
Wow, that's insane. Good luck, brothers to the south.
For the office, there is no problem, we are only 20 people, some of them run 2000, some of them run XP. It's a waste of money to upgrade OS and Office product when we don't need to change. Plus, we have to teach everybody that our paperclip buddy is gone.:) I'm not even on a domain because it's too much hassle and I can't be bothered. Same with exchange. And Shareportal server??? WTF is that? I do use SQL2000, they sent me the upgrade to 2003 but I'm not about to screw with something that works. We don't use it on the web. Don't need it, never will.
We aren't big enough to worry about all that stuff. My accounting stuff is locked down really tight and if I catch someone surfing porn I just go and yell at them in front of everybody. Only one person searched porn.
Anyway, when I was talking about XP and Vista I meant for machines that we sell to our customers. I know that eventually XP will be discoed, but that's when I buy 1000 copies and start developing a strategy to use Vista. Of course, we also has a nice product that runs on Disk-on-Module Linux, which has the super benefit of being a completely fresh install (except data stays around) everytime the machine is power cycled.
So when XP is discoed, if we have no other choice, one of our product lines will drop by the wayside. Of course, I am sure that we will find a solution, because 2 product lines is better than one.
LLAP
Slashdot Mirror
You guys did that all by yourselves. :)
OK we are talking a bit of apples and oranges, I'm talking the civil and your talking the criminal. I should perhaps have been more specific.
You can be sure that the contract (if there is one) is under the jurisdiction of russian law, not US law. Like I said in my post, if US citizens are involved, then they are liable, perhaps, but the russian entity is not. As to the slightly off topic... There is no good legal system. The US system is so backlogged and so top heavy its insane. Remember that case where the women spilled hot coffee on herself and sued (I think it was mcdonalds), so now they have to put warnings on their coffee cups that say hot. How stupid are you if you don't know that coffee is hot. Come on. I think that the criminal system is reasonable, however, your civil system is so out of wack. Everybody is looking for a free lunch at the expense of Corporate America. Geeze, look at all those guys who sit on patents, and then wait for somebody to invent something similar and then take them to court. Reality is, it's often cheaper to settle rather than go through the courts and hold up business. I agree with the plaintiff paying all court and legal costs, that would help a lot. Better yet, make the law firms pay for it. That would solve the problems for sure.
1. US law has nothing to do with "international law". International law consists of treaties. Only treaties signed by states is "binding" on that particular state. The WTO is not an organization based on US law.
2. In terms of international law, each body is a sovereign state, and is completely independent and free to do what it wants except as bound by the treaties that it is a signatore to. (Get it?)
3. Civil suits within the bounds of a sovereign state. DO NOT fall under the jurisdiction of the WTO. Think about it, would any country want the WTO coming in and saying, "we don't like your judgement in this case, so we are over ruling it.". The key here is sovereign.
All I can say is wow.
Why is the RIAA trying to sue someone in another country. The US has no jurisdiction.
Does the site have a presence in the US? Well? If it doesn't then they can get bent. Now they can go after all the people who paid the site to download songs, but not the site in Russia.
Please America, don't try to bring your horrible legal system to the rest of the world. We don't want it.
You could read this as.. What?? Money? We want money, give us some money. We want our share. Why can't we have our share?? Wahhhhh. We want money.
Or maybe people with a good out look on life just don't whine and complain as much. Maybe to happy people a little sniffle isn't as noticable as someone who is always complaining about things. It's like those people who look outside, see 2 flakes of snow and call into work saying they can't come in because it's snowing. "Oh, so your taking a vacation day??" OK, I'll be in on time. Sigh.
Hey, it's great to have a judge and an international legislator posting to slash dot. Since your opinion of what makes a crime is so relevent then it must be true. Might doesn't make right, this is true, but might sure as hell makes it happen. If you are some nobody with nothing, that is what you get accomplished. Anything else is, in my opinion, naive. Having a monopoly isn't a crime. Having an oligopoly isn't a crime either. As for the neighbour kicking the crap out of you, no that is true, but if you have money, and you want to, you can torment him in ways far worse than a crap beating. The golden rule. He who has the gold, makes the rules.
It's no different than any other corporation except it has become extremely successful, and has not exercised the highest standards of business practices. However, given the nature of the business, it's not doing anything that any other corporation would not do. Using all it's resources to be the most profitable it fan be.
I also think that a lot of people bash Microsoft because it's easy, and because they sound smart doing it. It's easy to sound smart when you are saying why things are bad. The more forceful you sound, the more reaasonable your argument. Most people don't understand/know/care enough to refute the argument.
Other people think that MS charges too much for product. Well, if you don't like it don't buy it. It's not my fault your on welfare.
Oh wow is me, I am too stupid to realize that I am stealing, and poor me, someone else should pay for me when I make a mistake. It's my right to avoid my problems by suing other people, it's my parents fault,and my teacher's fault, and the governments fault, and my neighbours fault, and...well just everybody but me. Once again, I am too stupid to know that getting free music is stealing. / Come on, you do the crime you do the time. Suck it up, and suffer.
I run a business with 15 people. We are classified a small business,but we are on the large side of that. I have an IT budget of $20,000 a year for office computers. Pretty generous I think. So I either buy new machines and put Vista on them, and office 2007, and go over my budget, or I can just sit with what I have now, and avoid all the training and hardship associated with it. I'm sure have the software we wrote in Visual Basic 6.0 will break and I'll have to spend weeks making it work. But I'm just not interested in all the extra work. They will have to drag me kicking and screaming towards Vista, it'll be like that Arnie movie where his head nearly explodes in low air pressure on the surface of Mars. Like your US President says "Ain't gonna do it."
There are all sorts of excuses out there about why people copy music. There are so few good CDs out there, the artists make enough money, the studios are ripping people off. Obviously there are so many more, but here's the thing. The artists worked to produce that album, the producers took a risk to produce that album. Damn people, no one expects you to work for free, and to give away your life's blood for free, so why should artists do it for free?? They have families to support, and lives to live just like everybody else, so what is the problem?
Having said that, I don't like the RIAAs heavy handed tactics and draconian tactics when it comes to enforcing their views on everybody. I don't like how the studios are ruining the new HDDVD standards, and I think it has great potential to ruin the new formats.
But here's the thing people, we have no one to blame but ourselves.
Yeah but look who is throwing around our secret code. Long live the Empire.
Yeah, I know, but its so hard to listen to new music these days. The radio is just so annoying (as posted by others). I am looking at XM, and I already have a receiver in my car, but I just haven't signed up. Subscriptions to things just don't sit right with me. Anyway, I know I should be a good Canadian and listen to good music, but even the last album from The Hip didn't tickle my fancy, and dammit, I live in Kingston, and my business partner is neighbors with one of the guys in the band. It just isn't enough.
We have a saying dere in quebec. Mange moi. :)
We are too busy making plans to invade our southern neighbor. Beware us!!!
I love music, I have a huge CD Collection, but recently I have not been purchasing too many CDs. This last couple of months I bought 3 CDs. The new Barenaked Ladies CD, the new Blue Rodeo Album, and a classic Bruce Springsteen album. Well... The new barenaked ladies I listed to once, and put away. Same with the Blue Rodeo Album (not a good effort Mr. Cuddy). The classic Bruce Springsteen was just great. I can point to several CDs by the Barenaked Ladies and Blue Rodeo that were incredibly. So why would I buy CDs that I'm going to listen to once? I'm just going to continue to listen to the albums published years ago that were great, and are still great. As for the new stuff, I'm going to listen to it on the radio, and in the unlikely event that some great music appears, I will buy it. That is why music sales are down, I think, people just are getting tired of crap. I hate to say it, but from a Canadian perspective, Canadian Content should be more concerned with the content than the Canadian.
OK so re-reading my article it does sound like I am ignoring what the nurses and the dieticians are saying, but that is not what I meant to say. What I was getting at was that everybody has a vested interest in keeping their jobs. For instance, the nurse says, "well you should come and see the nurse every week". What? Why? I test my blood sugar twice a day. I eat the right foods, I eat in moderation (regardless of my comments about steaks). I'm not looking for sympathy about anything wrong with me. I am dealing with it just fine thanks very much. Like I said, it's a family thing, and I knew it was coming. And as for the seminars, they were complete crap. I found out much more researching the web. Maybe other people find it useful, but for me it wasn't. Maybe I was to well prepared going into the seminar. Why are you saying I haven't recognized it. I quite plainly have, and I have made many changes to reflect the diabetes. Don't assume things I'm not saying. Finally, if you take medical advice from /. then you deserve what you get.
I know that exercise is the most important thing. I am SOOO lazy, and it is definitely a life style change.
I think what pisses me the most is they say don't eat anything with fat or carbs. I know this is to get the weight down, and I have lost a fair bit of weight, still got some to go, but much better. The fat and the carbs has nothing to do with the sugar, that's glucose and fructose, right?
I understand the concept of keeping my weight down, and I'm working on that. The nurses don't say why they want you to do something, just to do it. Most of the people in my group were writing everything she said like it was a prophesy from an Eddings novel.
They said inspect your feet, but not what for. Geeze. Anyway, I definitely have no interest in a slow painful death. I want to go out as an 80 year old coot in a Carrera GT with a 20 year old blonde bimbo beside me.
I recently found I have diabetes type 2. Thats the one where you have to watch your diet and take some metformin and other drugs (maybe), and exercise. (BLAH). Boo hoo for me, my Dad has it, my Grandfather on my mom's side, I'd be a little stupid if I wasn't expecting it. In any case, I went to these "Diabetes seminars" put on by the local hospital. There is a nurse, and she talks about how to take care of yourself. Lots of fliers, and basically, she says, don't eat this don't eat that, all the stuff I like. 3 days of seminars, and I have to go visit the nurse and do this and that and the other.
Eventually I figure out that this is just go generate easy money for the hospital. They are billing the province a huge amount for each seminar and visits, so I said screw it. Now I just do it myself and everything is fine.
Where am I going with this tho? Thanks for asking. Everybody is saying this is bad for you, that is bad for you. Oh, don't drink milk, it causes cancer. Don't eat peanut butter at school, people have allergy's. Freakin peanut butter, I grew up on that. Something is always bad for you. You have to eat something. I'll be damned if I'm going to spend my life eating rabbit food. Screw that.
So they are cloning my steaks now. Sometimes I find a really good tbone at the butcher, sometimes it's not so good. I would love to find one that I like, and clone that over and over again. Give me another a1j447L2K please. Perfect every time. Whew hew.
Let's not forget that every time somebody says something is bad for you, there is an agenda behind it. Pepsi says Coke is bad for you. Coke says Pepsi is bad for you. Milk marketers say juice is bad for you. The government wants you to know smoking is bad for you because it is a huge burdon on the health industry. (Well, it is bad for you, duh!).
It drives me crazy everybody telling me what to eat and what to drink. I'll do what I want.
It seems to me that lately the large players in the AV world (Norton, McAfee) have been trying so hard to differentiate their product from standard Microsoft offerings (i.e. add value to their products) that the cost/benefit of having one of the major player products is not good. We had a 20 or so copies of NAV 2005 (or maybe it was 2004) and we ordered them through Ingram Micro and we got the licences. So we installed the licences, and then a couple of weeks later they would need to be activated (again) but wouldn't accept the #. So after a month or so of this we scrapped the norton product, went to AVG and have had no problems since. So the moral of the story is that the large players are trying so hard to show that you HAVE TO have their product, and to make sure that you pay for it, that it is not a usable product, IMHO.
Heheh, my sister was hot, my buddies told me. I just didn't see it myself. Of course, they weren't in the bathtub with her one time (OK we were 3 and 2 years old) and she dropped a log. Definitely not hot. :)
My sister is one of those people who thinks of welfare as a career. She got that attitude from hanging out with other people who have that attitude. She got it in high school, going to a "trade" high school for less gifted students (AKA dumping grounds). She took classes like hair dressing, english and reading (this is high school folks). In any case, she dropped out with a baby and went on welfare (loser boyfriend = no choice). She never did get of welfare until she got married 15 years later. Now her husband is on workman's comp for a back injury, and he will never work again. So the long and short of this story, one night I was sitting around with one of her friends, and we were having an argument about working. I told her she should get a job and get of welfare. She told me she has a job, she has kids and raises them. It's not a job. It's a life choice, but since your other halves don't want to support you, it's not a good choice, and being on welfare is never a job. she never spoke to me again, my loss, she was a hottie.
Its another step backwards for the US legal system. The lawyers and their "cut of the winnings" style of payment is disabling the United States. I read a case once where someone tried to help someone, and was sued for it because they didn't do a good job. The moral of the story? Don't help anyone. Ever. Great. So if I have the facts right, some lady complained about services provided by another company and was awarded damages? Was what she said right? If it was right, why was she sued? If it wasn't right, then sure no problem, but if she was right. And 11 million dollars? What????????????? Wow, that's insane. Good luck, brothers to the south.
For the office, there is no problem, we are only 20 people, some of them run 2000, some of them run XP. It's a waste of money to upgrade OS and Office product when we don't need to change. Plus, we have to teach everybody that our paperclip buddy is gone. :) I'm not even on a domain because it's too much hassle and I can't be bothered. Same with exchange. And Shareportal server??? WTF is that? I do use SQL2000, they sent me the upgrade to 2003 but I'm not about to screw with something that works. We don't use it on the web. Don't need it, never will.
We aren't big enough to worry about all that stuff. My accounting stuff is locked down really tight and if I catch someone surfing porn I just go and yell at them in front of everybody. Only one person searched porn.
Anyway, when I was talking about XP and Vista I meant for machines that we sell to our customers. I know that eventually XP will be discoed, but that's when I buy 1000 copies and start developing a strategy to use Vista. Of course, we also has a nice product that runs on Disk-on-Module Linux, which has the super benefit of being a completely fresh install (except data stays around) everytime the machine is power cycled.
So when XP is discoed, if we have no other choice, one of our product lines will drop by the wayside. Of course, I am sure that we will find a solution, because 2 product lines is better than one.
LLAP