I am a lawyer. Microsoft's failure to allow the OSS community to "cure" Linux by removing possibly infringing code will surely mitigate against any damages they could secure. And an injunction isn't possible if Linux has cleaned up the questioned code. The only attack remaining is damages for deprivation of profits based on PAST use of supposedly infringing code ("PAST" meaning prior to making a claim that some is infringing and failing to specify what is alleged). These damages would be so highly speculative that any sensible judge would refer the issue to an expert (a "Master") to try to resolve. As the OSS community is not organized under any single banner that could not be hauled down with a new one run up right after, damages for past infringements might be uncollectible. And remember, no damages for future infringements are likely to be granted if OSS asked for the information needed to stop infringing and that information were denied them. That said, it must be noted it is not at all in Microsoft's interest to identify infringing code. I do firmly believe they can never stamp out free software, even if they can annoy some major businesses by suing them for IP infringements in the past. I think those businesses would have a defense, however, to damages requested for periods after Microsoft refused to say what the infringing code was.
In the USA this kind of abuse will never be addressed effectively under a Republican administration. VOTE DEMOCRAT! It's time to ELIMINATE CORPORATE PREFERENCES.
Oh you are so wrong. This might work with a bank card but if you have a major credit card (MBNA, CitiBank) you DO NOT HAVE THE RIGHT to block a recharge or correcting charge from someone you did business with. Car rental companies generally won't rent to you on a debit card because you have too much control over charging them back. The major credit cards specialize in bending the consumer over for the merchant. They can even REFUSE TO CANCEL YOUR CREDIT CARD, or IMPOSE A CHARGE AFTER YOU *HAVE* CANCELLED.
Anyone think our current government is a tad too friendly to big business?
This move makes lots of sense. No one smart is going to pay for net use by the kilobyte or put up with a capped or throttled connection. Apple appears to be giving Cingular an incentive to make the IPhone a non-metered device.
Microwave radiation even in modest amounts can produce lasting symptoms. Consider Ross Adey and the Lida machine (North Korean brainwashing machine). I personally knew a man who had been subjected to this technique as an Army Intelligence operative in Korea, and he was perpetually spaced. Not convinced? Look here.
In law, at least, a discipline with which I am familiar, one learns how to think as a lawyer by looking at thousands of problems (cases) that have been solved by other lawyers before you. Would not even a "tradesmanlike" education expose the student to enough aspects of engineering problem-solving to instill the correct, circumspect mindset? Of course, one has to consider the reasoning behind every solution, not just learn methods, though even that may teach a lot if the student is insightful.
For cattle at least, this method would be WAY too easy to defeat by placing a brand over the tattoo (assuming you know where to put the brand-- you'd need a reader).
"Compared to a conventional house, the speed of construction will be increased 200-fold and the building costs will be reduced to a fifth of what they are today," said Khoshnevis.
Hmmm--- a 200-fold increase in speed of contstruction but only a fivefold savings? I don't think the cost of materials is that large compared to labor. Who would be getting the $PROFIT$ here??
Hi,
I very much agree with your comment, and I am interested further in your ideas. What economic problems do you see with "a class of people who live off interest of their ancestors' money". I see immediate problems myself, e.g. unproductivity, undue accumulation, but I wonder if you have thought of others. Feel free to email me at lwm at map dot com. So I'll see it, it would be a good idea to put the word "slashdot" in the email subject line. Regards, lwm
There is a fundamental philosophical principle in play. How far down the line of posterity should the "dead hand" control freedom of the living? In the English common law, which is the basis of US law as well, no conveyance of an interest in real property shall be valid unless it must vest in an ultimate, unrestricted owner within twenty-one years of the termination of a life in being. This means you can leave your realty to your son for life, and 21 years later to those of your descendants then living, but you CANNOT leave it to your son for life, then to your unborn grandson for life, then to your unborn great-grandson in perpetuity. If copyright protections were analogous, copyright would extend for the life of the creator plus a maximum of twenty-one years. Is that reasonable or not? It has been found to be so for how long you can control the vesting of your realty after your death. (I have left out some subtleties, but I think this poses the question.)
When President Teddy Roosevelt had J.P. Morgan in for a lecture on monopolistic behavior, he remarked to his aide after the meeting that "that fellow Morgan spoke to me as an equal or a colleague, when I am the President of the United States"!
Wouldn't you want your government to check out direct associates of Osama bin Laden? What is the difference as long as the arrestee has the protections of law? How is "democracy dead in Britain" when we don't know the NATURE of the link between the two? What if it was letters back and forth talking about their hopes to advance the Glorious Cause? And even if the woman was merely a name in an address book, should investigating that name be prohibited? The arrest, remember, came AFTER evidence consistent with terrorist operations was found with an associate of someone in possession of a night-vision scope and a poisons manual. In the US, that's enough for a conspiracy investigation-- which also gets nowhere without EVIDENCE FOUND ON THE ARRESTEE. Since such evidence was found, what is the problem?
The worst thing about/. is frequency of its alarmist or sensationalist story titles. At best, this headline should have been something like "Server Deployments of Linux Expected to Outnumber MS Deployments". Really, what is the objective here? If it is to intrigue the reader to view the story, I guess it works. If it is to cheapen/. down to the level of a tabloid, I guess that works too.
Editors, please moderate yourselves!! It is not responsible journalism to justify use of a headline because it is a quote from someone, somewhere. Responsible editors weigh the real import of the news and brand it accordingly.
Slashdot Mirror
I am a lawyer. Microsoft's failure to allow the OSS community to "cure" Linux by removing possibly infringing code will surely mitigate against any damages they could secure. And an injunction isn't possible if Linux has cleaned up the questioned code. The only attack remaining is damages for deprivation of profits based on PAST use of supposedly infringing code ("PAST" meaning prior to making a claim that some is infringing and failing to specify what is alleged). These damages would be so highly speculative that any sensible judge would refer the issue to an expert (a "Master") to try to resolve. As the OSS community is not organized under any single banner that could not be hauled down with a new one run up right after, damages for past infringements might be uncollectible. And remember, no damages for future infringements are likely to be granted if OSS asked for the information needed to stop infringing and that information were denied them. That said, it must be noted it is not at all in Microsoft's interest to identify infringing code. I do firmly believe they can never stamp out free software, even if they can annoy some major businesses by suing them for IP infringements in the past. I think those businesses would have a defense, however, to damages requested for periods after Microsoft refused to say what the infringing code was.
In the USA this kind of abuse will never be addressed effectively under a Republican administration. VOTE DEMOCRAT! It's time to ELIMINATE CORPORATE PREFERENCES.
That's QUASHED, probably because if they say SSSQUASHED, lawyers sound too much like snakes.
Anyone think our current government is a tad too friendly to big business?
..or at least we're darn well getting there.
This move makes lots of sense. No one smart is going to pay for net use by the kilobyte or put up with a capped or throttled connection. Apple appears to be giving Cingular an incentive to make the IPhone a non-metered device.
Microwave radiation even in modest amounts can produce lasting symptoms. Consider Ross Adey and the Lida machine (North Korean brainwashing machine). I personally knew a man who had been subjected to this technique as an Army Intelligence operative in Korea, and he was perpetually spaced. Not convinced? Look here.
In law, at least, a discipline with which I am familiar, one learns how to think as a lawyer by looking at thousands of problems (cases) that have been solved by other lawyers before you. Would not even a "tradesmanlike" education expose the student to enough aspects of engineering problem-solving to instill the correct, circumspect mindset? Of course, one has to consider the reasoning behind every solution, not just learn methods, though even that may teach a lot if the student is insightful.
For cattle at least, this method would be WAY too easy to defeat by placing a brand over the tattoo (assuming you know where to put the brand-- you'd need a reader).
"Compared to a conventional house, the speed of construction will be increased 200-fold and the building costs will be reduced to a fifth of what they are today," said Khoshnevis. Hmmm--- a 200-fold increase in speed of contstruction but only a fivefold savings? I don't think the cost of materials is that large compared to labor. Who would be getting the $PROFIT$ here??
Well, I can tell you for sure, as a pilot, that the more instruments you have on your panel, the simpler the plane is to fly.
Bram COHEN = BitTorrent
Bram STOKER = Dracula
That's very different!
Hi, I very much agree with your comment, and I am interested further in your ideas. What economic problems do you see with "a class of people who live off interest of their ancestors' money". I see immediate problems myself, e.g. unproductivity, undue accumulation, but I wonder if you have thought of others. Feel free to email me at lwm at map dot com. So I'll see it, it would be a good idea to put the word "slashdot" in the email subject line. Regards, lwm
There need to be different rules for corporate and individual copyright holders; RIAA on the one hand, and J.K. Rowling on the other.
There is a fundamental philosophical principle in play. How far down the line of posterity should the "dead hand" control freedom of the living? In the English common law, which is the basis of US law as well, no conveyance of an interest in real property shall be valid unless it must vest in an ultimate, unrestricted owner within twenty-one years of the termination of a life in being. This means you can leave your realty to your son for life, and 21 years later to those of your descendants then living, but you CANNOT leave it to your son for life, then to your unborn grandson for life, then to your unborn great-grandson in perpetuity. If copyright protections were analogous, copyright would extend for the life of the creator plus a maximum of twenty-one years. Is that reasonable or not? It has been found to be so for how long you can control the vesting of your realty after your death. (I have left out some subtleties, but I think this poses the question.)
But Novell is probably indemnified by Microsoft-- everyone else is not.
When President Teddy Roosevelt had J.P. Morgan in for a lecture on monopolistic behavior, he remarked to his aide after the meeting that "that fellow Morgan spoke to me as an equal or a colleague, when I am the President of the United States"!
I wonder whether there is a chance Bill might actually do this in his will. He has enough cash to take Microsoft private if he wants, I imagine.
Wouldn't you want your government to check out direct associates of Osama bin Laden? What is the difference as long as the arrestee has the protections of law? How is "democracy dead in Britain" when we don't know the NATURE of the link between the two? What if it was letters back and forth talking about their hopes to advance the Glorious Cause? And even if the woman was merely a name in an address book, should investigating that name be prohibited? The arrest, remember, came AFTER evidence consistent with terrorist operations was found with an associate of someone in possession of a night-vision scope and a poisons manual. In the US, that's enough for a conspiracy investigation-- which also gets nowhere without EVIDENCE FOUND ON THE ARRESTEE. Since such evidence was found, what is the problem?
I wonder if it also means it will get harder to turn off annoying Flash ads when browsing with Firefox.
Editors, please moderate yourselves!! It is not responsible journalism to justify use of a headline because it is a quote from someone, somewhere. Responsible editors weigh the real import of the news and brand it accordingly.
"Ah, Lawsuits. Is there any problem you can't solve?
Yes. The lawyers don't keel over and die when they're finished, like the should."
HEY! I am a lawyer.
M$ wants a piece of the support revenues for Suse. Watch the cost of Suse support climb.
Not in Britain. Companies are always plural.
I understand the island of Pomita, off the coast of Tasmania, is available for these types.