Statute of limitations, and its equitable cousin laches, prevent one from bringing claims after a certain period of time eg 2 years after an incident. SCO brought the claim within the appropriate time frame, and in any case they allege the infringement is ongoing (and so the only issue related to statute of limitations is how far back damages can be calculated - usually two or so years before the claim was issued).

There are other doctrines that may apply during and after a proceeding. For example res judicata (the civil/tort equivalent of what we call 'double jeopardy' in a criminal context, which prevents re-hearing a claim that has been determined already on the merits in an ongoing or previous proceeding) or its related (sometimes included) cousin collateral estoppel (prevents re-hearing an issue that has been determined in an ongoing, previous or parallel proceeding).

I do not know the facts of this case well enough to comment, but the above are the legal concepts that prevent re-hearing of issues that have already been decided (IAAL; this is not legal advice, and please seek out a lawyer for advice). I expect these issues are more likely to apply than statute of limitations.

WindowMaker has a special place in my heart, right next to BlackBox. I still look at them and go "cool".

I hope someone revitalizes BlackBox, too. It was just plain neat.

Sir –

With all due respect, and perhaps I have misread, but this statement is utter nonsense. To take this statement at face value one must ignore the following Christian influences in the USA:

- Anti-gay ("God hates fags")
- Pro-war (eg putting religious quotes on top of war briefs being given to George Bush)
- The violent anti-abortion movements
- The inherent racism of Christian fellowships such as the Klu Klux Klan
- The rounding of "Pi" to 3, denial of evolution, anathema of intelligence, and other assorted absurdities

That is off the top of my head. The list is practically endless thanks to the magical thinking a society as wealthy as the US can tolerate. US politicians run on campaigns of anti-gay, etc., so as to distract from their real objectives: to advance the political and economic gain of the rich at the expense of the poor.

If you do not consider the plethora of hatred, assaults, murders, invasions, brainwashing, the denial of irrefutable facts, and the destruction of society's capacity to understand and contribute to the advancement of human society to be "bad", then perhaps the Temperance movement is the only "bad" movement in the U.S. that can be attributed to Christians. I suggest it's probably the least noteworthy.

Religious thought negatively impacts economic growth, civil rights, critical thinking, scientific progress, human rights, and fundamental freedoms. It is a form of brainwashing supported by baseless fear-mongering and propaganda, masquerading as a social utility. Abolition, suffrage, and civil rights movements succeeded not because they were born of Christians but because they encouraged people to think and empathize. These three examples are stark contrast to the populist thought in the US now.

The people who make your world better, the educated engineers, civil rights activists, professors, are predominantly skeptical of Christianity. They are not driven by hate like the throng of evil-mongering zealots because they are busy making actual contributions to society.

This is not a horrifying concept, but it also has nothing to do with religious influence in the USA. Religious influence in the USA takes the form of a pestilence.

The founding fathers of the United States were, if anything, extraordinarily skeptical of the value of Christianity. With good reason: they were conscious of the evils inherent to religious movements.

Good result.

Bad hate to think ratio.

Some suggest that you can put a satellite into space for $8,000. I don't know how credible that price is.

Bouncing RF waves off the moon seems more cost effective and reliable.

Wikileaks should put a server on a satellite in orbit if they want autonomy.

Just curious: Do you prefer the word "poaching" in the following sense: âoetake or acquire in an unfair or clandestine wayâ to describe those in a parasitic relationship with Wikipedia (i.e. those who take its content to create link-farms)?

Those fabulous steps to Draconian governance from Western-style democracies are:

1. Establish a basis for circumventing human rights (eg "terrorism" or "piracy" or "national security", etc.);

2. Imbue state systems with financial gain from said basis (eg prison industrial complex, military industrial complex, etc.);

3. Have said systems lobby for increased funding and authority, encroaching on traditional authorities (eg policing, prosecutors, media, voting systems, etc);

4. Expand the application of the basis for circumventing human rights to other areas (eg immigration, child pornography, copyright violations, any other interests with lobbyists);

5. Enact laws that undermine the financing of political dissension, and undermine systems that may allow any discourse critical of the established government;

6. Engage in mass human rights violations, ghettoization, prison labour; State ignores human rights, imprisons or executes dissenters and acts with impunity and disregard for reason;

7. The state becomes a vehicle for despots supported by demagoguery. Non tenet anguillam, per caudam qui tenet illam.

Another neat framework similar to Django is Flask.

Jinja2 is essentially a drop-in replacement for Django templates, and some consider Jinja2 to be superior.

Gopher to the rescue.

By Douglas Adams: Milliways aka The Restaurant at the End of the Universe.

Then it's on to breakfast at the The Big Bang Burger Bar.

I just discovered Gandi.net in another Slashdot article, and they offer VPS. Does anyone have any experience with them?

I've been using Linode (transferred from Slicehost). Linode is fabulous, and Slicehost was great in its day but hasn't really been updated since Rackspace bought it. I'm curious how Gandi.net compares.

Sir –

I'm sorry, I didn't see a single law firm (major or otherwise) on the list of supporters linked from the story.

Is the parent comment referring to a different list perhaps? If not, it would be troll, and IMHO ought to be modded down.

Any debate on privacy always draws me to The Right to Privacy, by Warren and Brandeis Harvard Law Review. Vol. IV December 15, 1890 No. 5:

The relationship between this 120 year old paper and modern society is illuminating.

Problem... Solved.