If _any_ government employee makes a mistake, all opposition politicians and media outlets might bitch about it for months (depending on who got fucked). So it's natural that a bureucracy evolves and more workers are needed because 60% of time is spent on asscovering.
Without knowing anything at all about the US legal system, common sense suggests to me that the identity should at least be kept a secret until a verdict is given (if possible). If the accused is aqquited, s/he could be allowed to remain anonymous.
But that clearly didn't happen in this case. In a case where that happened, the victim would probably seek some relief after discovering the identity of the web-thug.
There is nothing in nature that says thinking people ought to be able to pursue their lives. Exept you, me, and some random philosophers.
Like there is nothing in nature that says ISPs should be forbidden from treating packets differently based on source/destination. Execpt me and some random slashbots.
Heh. You meant Experian was defaming the poster. I thought you meant that the poster (and the hundreds of other posters) was defaming Experian. It seems we agree =)
If you typed out all kernel header macros manually, and declared all linked functions manually, you might be able to argue that.
But your code would STILL depend on code that only exists as GPL (as opposed to libc/system calls). It would be a clear derivative work of the linux kernel, in my opinion. Especially since the Linux kernel has no published module API. IANAL, of course.
But under the GPS, merely linking to a library causes the entire work to be considered derivative of that library.
I guess you mean GPL, not GPS, but the point is that linking is considered a derivative by the FSF - not by a court of law. What I tried getting across in my last paragraph was that if you disagree, then you are free to publish your work anyway. The FSF would probably say you were breaking the GPL, though.
But say you use a GNU-specific extension to some Unix library - that would count as a derivative work, wouldn't it?
So, if I read some public list of people working at, say, DMV, and find public records of their adresses online, and post this, I'm a terrorist? (Since I'm not a US citizen I would not even be a domestic terrorist - I would be one of those Al-Queda buggers)
Bollocks. It's not like that. Saying that the recipies goes toghether without copying the recipies down is clearly not infringing on copyright. But publishing your own cookbook where you compile the two into one recipie for ribs and beans, clearly is.
If you base you work on another, copyrighted work, you need permission for the original work. And the owners offers it to you, provided you fullfill the details laid out in the license. If you don't want to, then try to get another deal (e.g. pay the authors). If you don't think your work should be considered derivative, then go ahead and publish it without the license. But be prepared for bad karma and legal problems if you're wrong.
Well, any c++0x runtime library for DOS would now have to do its own threads. Not impossible - but it makes it less likely any DOS c++0x compiler will emerge.
The most effective solution might be to purge all godaddy/registrar.com (and similar) IPs from the root servers. Methinks they would get their act together fairly quickly.
Of course, this would cause its own set of problems.
There is really nothing to gain from invalidating the GPL - if that happened, noone but the authors would have rights to the code, it wouldn't magically become public domain.
And then the authors could just find some other license.
Oh, and in case you tend to trust legal advice on Slashdot, IANAL.
Slashdot Mirror
Japan requires fingerpints.
Since visiting Japan, I can sleep safely knowing that every western spook archive now has my fingerprint on file.
Oh, and it still uses X11.
I figured it would use something like http://gtk-osx.sourceforge.net/ - that seems like a much better resource.
http://gimp-app.sourceforge.net/
Too bad it seems relly alpha-quality.
If _any_ government employee makes a mistake, all opposition politicians and media outlets might bitch about it for months (depending on who got fucked). So it's natural that a bureucracy evolves and more workers are needed because 60% of time is spent on asscovering.
Well, you are kind of right -- there is no laptop version.
There is, however, a netbook version.
Just toss him a donut every now and then.
Aaaah, bribery.
Articles are linked across languages. Look at the left edge of the browser window the next time you read a Wikipedia article (in a LTR language).
Thank you sir; I always wondered how to properly defame an officer of the Law.
Without knowing anything at all about the US legal system, common sense suggests to me that the identity should at least be kept a secret until a verdict is given (if possible). If the accused is aqquited, s/he could be allowed to remain anonymous.
But that clearly didn't happen in this case. In a case where that happened, the victim would probably seek some relief after discovering the identity of the web-thug.
There is nothing in nature that says thinking people ought to be able to pursue their lives. Exept you, me, and some random philosophers.
Like there is nothing in nature that says ISPs should be forbidden from treating packets differently based on source/destination. Execpt me and some random slashbots.
Heh. You meant Experian was defaming the poster. I thought you meant that the poster (and the hundreds of other posters) was defaming Experian. It seems we agree =)
Well, they get held responsible for social order, at least. Every day.
Maybe it's true? In that case, it's not defamation.
Well, maybe if other countries could be likely to raise similar demands.
If you typed out all kernel header macros manually, and declared all linked functions manually, you might be able to argue that.
But your code would STILL depend on code that only exists as GPL (as opposed to libc/system calls). It would be a clear derivative work of the linux kernel, in my opinion. Especially since the Linux kernel has no published module API. IANAL, of course.
I guess you mean GPL, not GPS, but the point is that linking is considered a derivative by the FSF - not by a court of law. What I tried getting across in my last paragraph was that if you disagree, then you are free to publish your work anyway. The FSF would probably say you were breaking the GPL, though.
But say you use a GNU-specific extension to some Unix library - that would count as a derivative work, wouldn't it?
So, if I read some public list of people working at, say, DMV, and find public records of their adresses online, and post this, I'm a terrorist? (Since I'm not a US citizen I would not even be a domestic terrorist - I would be one of those Al-Queda buggers)
I'm not sure that makes sense to me...
Bollocks. It's not like that. Saying that the recipies goes toghether without copying the recipies down is clearly not infringing on copyright. But publishing your own cookbook where you compile the two into one recipie for ribs and beans, clearly is.
If you base you work on another, copyrighted work, you need permission for the original work. And the owners offers it to you, provided you fullfill the details laid out in the license. If you don't want to, then try to get another deal (e.g. pay the authors). If you don't think your work should be considered derivative, then go ahead and publish it without the license. But be prepared for bad karma and legal problems if you're wrong.
Well, any c++0x runtime library for DOS would now have to do its own threads. Not impossible - but it makes it less likely any DOS c++0x compiler will emerge.
Well, in this case I would think that most free software projects (with their open bug trackers) would be in the clear?
I would think that right click should be simulated in the touch screen driver, not in the desktop shell?
Do you _really_ think the "drill baby, drill"-crowd is gonna change their minds because of a bit more evidence?
The most effective solution might be to purge all godaddy/registrar.com (and similar) IPs from the root servers. Methinks they would get their act together fairly quickly.
Of course, this would cause its own set of problems.
There is really nothing to gain from invalidating the GPL - if that happened, noone but the authors would have rights to the code, it wouldn't magically become public domain.
And then the authors could just find some other license.
Oh, and in case you tend to trust legal advice on Slashdot, IANAL.