As you'll see from the report, their site got hacked last year revealing their victims' details as well as internal communications of the firm itself. The stuff got plastered all over the Internet at the time. Just desserts?
Well, yes - who exactly gave them any such right to suggest anything? Who do they speak for? - you? me?
The original idea of the open internet was to promote communication between peer academic institutions for the dissemination of research data.
All the other nodes simply plugged in to this network and it expanded from there.
It all makes me wonder if Google really even has the right to impose its own end-user Terms and Conditions on any user.
Terms and Conditions? Is this anything to to with egalitarian democracy? What gives Google the right to suggest any policy to the government? Who has given them, or anyone else for that matter, (corporate or political entity) - any such mandate?
A drug resistant germ can produce a hula hoop shaped thingy called a plasmid.
For the purpose of this discussion, call it a floppy.
The drug resistant germ passes the code to deal with the antibiotic to its peers which become drug resistant.
and CLAP = Copyright Litigation And Patents.
SCO (now CLAP) might sue me for slander of title?
CLAP = Copyrights And Patents Litigation.
They will be back for more.
Conclusion: SCO is a superbug!
The devil's advocate position is that it's all very well and good to hold to your principles, but they're unlikely to keep you from being dead.
The vikings in Greenland considered eating fish taboo. They died pure.
You can fire up your Linux system now in the knowledge that you are not infringing on Unix IP