Can't it be both? At the time when the 777 was being created, Mulally was the director of engineering for the project.
Some corporate executives worked to get where they are today.
"We claim no intellectual property rights over the material you provide to the Service. Your profile and materials uploaded remain yours. However, by setting your pages to be viewed publicly, you agree to allow others to view your Content. By setting your repositories to be viewed publicly, you agree to allow others to view and fork your repositories."(emphasis mine)
So technically, even if you do scream bloody murder, by uploading the content to github, you have given blanket permission to users to not only view, but fork your code.
Most software that returns results from/sends queries to an outside source is opt-in. You're asked on installation if you want to send anonymous usage statistics to improve later versions of <software_package> You're asked if you want to send a crash report to <software_vendor>.
Even Microsoft is asking you what search providers you want to use when you first run IE. How difficult would it be during the ubuntu installation to ask "Do you want to include results from Amazon in dash searches?" and only install the package if the box is ticket? Like Debian does with popcon?
Why Opt-in Marketing Matters. Point 1.b in the comparison in this short article seems to apply perfectly to what RMS is saying.
All three of those cause concussions with an alarming frequency as well.
PS3 Users report latest Firmware disables some USB adapters
"This is old technology being used in a new way. The only difference here is that we've shifted energy between two different buildings," says Klas Johnasson, who is one of the creators of the system and head of Jernhusen's environmental division.
"There are about 250,000 people a day who pass through Stockholm Central Station. They in themselves generate a bit of heat. But they also do a lot of activities. They buy food, they buy drinks, they buy newspapers and they buy books. All this energy generates an enormous amount of heat. So why shouldn't we use this heat. It's there. If we don't use it then it will just be ventilated away to no avail.""
Link to Original Source
If Unix ownership is going to be transferred to anyone, it should be transferred to someone who actually has some interest in Unix. IBM(AIX), HP(HP-UX), Oracle(Solaris)...
At least at one time, Novell had some hand in the game, as a co-developer of UnixWare.
Linux, as has been mentioned many, many times, is not Unix. There is no reason any of those organizations would or should be interested in ownership of something that doesn't benefit them in the slightest. It just doesn't make any sense.
You, my good sir, are right. From the DNSSEC FAQ:
Within the context of DNS, security only refers to authentication, not confidentiality. DNSSEC extends DNS so that resolvers can receive provably correct information. DNS itself (the protocol, not necessarily all implementations) has no way of hiding data - a query can originate from any host, and any host will receive the same answer to the same query. Access control is not part of DNS, and it is not part of DNSSEC. Information designed for private viewing should not be stored in DNS.