Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

+ - Motorola asks judge to remove Windows from german market->

Submitted by xonen
xonen (774419) writes "

Microsoft could lose its rights to distribute in Germany products that use the H.264 video standard and the 802.11 WiFi standard, pending a court ruling on April 17. According to Motorola, those products infringe on its patents.

If the court rules that Microsoft indeed infringes on Motorola's intellectual property in its use of these standardized technologies, this could exclude Microsoft from the German market and cause irreparable harm to Microsoft and the public, Microsoft claimed in court documents filed with the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington on Wednesday. The software company asked the U.S. court for a temporary restraining order and a preliminary injunction preventing Motorola from enforcing any legal victory in its case being heard in Mannheim, Germany, until a U.S. lawsuit between both companies is decided.

Microsoft said it had to resort to filing for a preliminary injunction in the United States because Motorola was not willing to accept an offer of a $300 million in bond to postpone any enforcement of the possible German verdict until the U.S. case was settled.

Popcorn anyone?"
Link to Original Source

Comment: Re:"net neutrality" is control play (Score 2, Insightful) 402

by Ziktar (#34119706) Attached to: Net Neutrality Supporters Hammered In Elections

Quality of Service is not what "Net Neutrality" is about. You've described a QoS system, which, while some people may not like, is not the fundamental threat of a non-neutral net. In the world of the non-neutral net, AT&T wants Google to pay them money for the right to be viewed by their customers. In a non-neutral net, Yahoo could partner with AT&T and together say that AT&T customers cannot access Google search, but rather only Yahoo search. Or if they're not so evil as to block Google search, they will just purposefully send Google queries over a slower pipe than Yahoo queries, making people think that Google is slow, when in reality it's an artificial speed degradation meant to line AT&T's pockets by blackmailing content providers to pay them more.

Throttling on the application layer (BitTorrent packets can arrive out of order, or arrive later, than Skype packets since P2P doesn't need real-time access) is one thing. But the big ISPs want to throttle on the end-point, in order to extract money from Google, Hulu, Netflix or any random new web service that provides cool new content.

Comment: Re:Very stupid question, but... (Score 5, Insightful) 398

by Ziktar (#33283432) Attached to: Feds Won't File Charges In School Laptop-Spy Case

The students did detect this. They saw the light blinking on and off, and reported it. These claims were dismissed as something wrong with the light. Of course, the fact that the claims were dismissed by the very group of people who could be taking the pictures should have made it seem a bit suspicious...

+ - RIAA Accounting: How Labels Avoid Paying Musicians-> 1

Submitted by Anonymous Coward
An anonymous reader writes "Last week, Slashdot posted Techdirt's story about "Hollywood Accounting" which showed how movies like Harry Potter still officially "lose" money with some simple accounting tricks. This week, Techdirt is taking on RIAA accounting, and showing why most musicians (even multi-platinum recording stars) may never see a dime from their album sales. The major labels basically give you a loan, but then demand the first 63% of any dollar you make, get to automatically increase the size of the "loan" by simply adding in all sorts of crazy expenses (did the exec bring in pizza at the recording session? that gets added on), and then tries to get the loan repaid out of what meager pittance they've left for you. Oh, and after all of that, the record label still owns the copyrights. The average musician on a major record deal "gets" about $23 per $1,000 made... and that $23 still never gets paid because it has to go to "recouping" the loan... even though the label is taking $630 out of that $1,000, and not counting it towards the advance. Remember all this the next time a record label says they're trying to protect musicians' revenue."
Link to Original Source

+ - RIAA paid $16M + legal fees to collect $391k-> 1

Submitted by NewYorkCountryLawyer
NewYorkCountryLawyer (912032) writes "In a rare outburst of subjectivity, I commenced my blog post 'Ha ha ha ha ha' when reporting that, based upon the RIAA's disclosure form for 2008, it had paid its lawyers more than $16,000,000 to recover $391,000. If they were doing it to 'send a message', the messages have been received loud & clear: (1) the big 4 record labels are managed by idiots, (2) the RIAA's law firms have as much compassion for their client as they do for the lawsuit victims, (3) suing endusers, or alleged endusers, is a losing game. I don't know why p2pnet.net begrudges the RIAA's boss his big compensation; he did a good job.... for the lawyers."
Link to Original Source

Dead? No excuse for laying off work.

Working...