Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Slashback

Slashback: Licensure, Restriction, Cometry 249

Posted by timothy from the phony-plastic-owls dept.
Slashback tonight with more on the continuing role of Mitchell Baker with the Mozilla project, flying through comet trails, gaming particulars, and the interesting Microsoft FrontPage EULA forbidding certain types of web pages be made with it.

Because not everything is as simple as who signs your paycheck ... cetan writes: "As a follow up to being laid off by AOL from Netscape, Mitchell Baker posted an article on Mozillazine discussing her role within Mozilla.org."

Can you think of a title to help her replace "Chief Lizard Wrangler"? All that wrangling has been a good thing, though, as recent builds make clear. I'd like to suggest "Reptilian Ambassador."

Sometimes, you just have to play. t0qer writes: "This is an update to this story. Originally I said kaillera was a net enabled version of mame, it's actually a free SDK to enable any emulator to have netplay. It was written by Christophe Thibault, of winamp fame. Contrary to some comments that the code was ripped from netmame, it was actually borged from jnetlib which was written by his boss and buddy Justin Frankel. So far kaillera has been adopted by 10 different emulators.

Speaking of games, iphayd writes: "Graeme Devine updated his plan , and released a version of Return to Castle Wolfenstein. While this isn't interesting in itself, he's claiming that he is getting 3x the frame rate on a dual 800 G4 system than his dual P3 800 system."

You shall not convert the news headlines in the MSNBC component into an audio format. MarkedMan writes: "There has been some confusion over Microsoft's Frontpage EULA, with some claiming it prohibited using the software to produce works disparaging Microsoft and some saying it simply prohibited the use of the Frontpage logo on such sites. (The logo restriction actually seemed reasonable to me.) After some searching I found that some versions of the EULA do indeed limit use of the program itself. This from Northwestern University's Microsoft User License: Check out page 2, section 2. http://www.tss.northwestern.edu/select/mspur.pdf"

We have come to terms. bkuhn writes: "The FSF and FSMLabs have an agreement on a GPL-compliant version of the RTLinux Open Patent License. You can read our statement and related press release on the matter."

It's cool to see this sort of conflict work be met and resolved.

Not quite a date with a star. Troodon writes "A brief reminder, JPL and BBCnews report that this Saturday (22/SEP/2001) at 2230 Universal time (3:30 p.m. PDT) Deep Space 1 has a date with the Comet Borrelly"

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Slashback: Licensure, Restriction, Cometry More

Slashback: Licensure, Restriction, Cometry

Comments Filter:
  • Who is the turd who came out with the name operation INFINATE JUSTICE?
    • Let's see. . .who do we know in the government who can't string two words together without sounding like a dumbass?
    • Yah that is a smart & stupid name.

      As earlier posts have pointed out, in the Koran, only Allah has infinite justice, probably the U.S. military using this as a name would definately piss off some Taliban leaders.
      kinda funny though, some of those people don't
      worship Allah, some people worship Bin-Laden

      Secondly, In my own opinion it's also a stupid title for a military operation, the justice isn't going to be so infinite if we get our asses kicked
      I have alot of faith in the military, but I know they're not invincible.

      • the justice isn't going to be so infinite if we get our asses kicked

        Military operations have nothing to do with justice. American kids trying to serve their country will die to kill Afghan kids trying to defend their country. There is no evidence, so far, that Osama bin Laden is actually responsible for the attacks on NY and DC. The purpose of the war seems to be to make US politicians more popular with the US electorate. It worked for Clinton. It will probably work for GWB.
        • Wise words, dude.

          How about 'Operation knee-jerk reaction'?

        • There is no evidence, so far, that Osama bin Laden is actually responsible for the attacks on NY and DC.

          You mean besides the guy who was involved and told the FBI that they were working for bin Laden? Never mind the fact that we should have gone after him after the first WTC bombing, or failing that certainly after the US embassy bombings, to say nothing of the USS Cole.

          As for military operations having nothing to do with justice, that's just silly. Look at World War II for an example. Or how about Kosovo? I don't really think the US had much selfish intent there. Sorry. I just don't buy it. Yes, people die in wars. And sometimes they're innocent people. That is a tragedy, but it is sometimes a necessary one. I have some very close friends in the military, and they took oaths to defend this country and her interests even at the expense of their own lives. That was a decision they made when they entered military service. As for the Afghan kids, if they were conscripted I feel sorry for them. But that just makes me believe even more strongly that the Taliban needs to fall.

          As for your "purpose of the war", I think that's just silly. I am as cynical about politicians as anybody, but if you think that Bush is taking the country into this war as a popularity stunt then you are absolutely insane. He as much as said last night that Americans would die in the war. And every politician knows that Americans in body bags hurts popularity. As he said, this is not going to be like the Gulf War or Kosovo. We'll have to fight a ground war, and that means casualties. So no, it probably won't work to increase long-term popularity for GWB. I believe that he's doing what he perceives to be the Right Thing. I happen to agree with him. He has shown himself to be a strong president. God help us if Gore had been in office. "Sure, Osama, I'll bend over and take it up the ass for you." The only reason we even have to deal with this now is that Clinton didn't have the balls to do anything about it when he should have.
    • Supposably, it's the follow-up to an earlier operation, "Infinite Reach." You know, when Clinton decided it would be a great idea to destroy aspirin plants in the Sudan? :P
      http://www.asc.upenn.edu/usr/jsexton/NewsWatch/i ss ue19.htm
    • Besides the spelling, I have no idea why they called this Operation: Infinte Justice. Why not Operation: CounterTerrorist Assualt or Operation: Kill Terrorist or Operation: Get Bin Laden, etc? Oh yeah, because the federal government sounds better if it uses words that mask the meaning of the operation. It's a linguistic game they play all the time. You know, when your job is being reingeneered instead of being fired? One sounds a lot worse than the other. The gov't is obviously going to pick a name that obscures the questionable actions of the gov't and replaces them with something less attackable, such as reaping justice. Bringing down revenge would put some people in a fit, but who can argue with getting justice?

      Not saying that the operation may not be for the best, but this is probably wy they chose the name: it limited potential criticism.

      F-bacher
      • How about "Operation: Counter Terrorists Win"?
        • Neal Boortz, the talk radio libertarian, suggests Operation Terrible Resolve, after the famous quote from Admiral Yamamoto of the Japanese Navy after Pearl Harbor : "We have woken a sleeping giant and filled him with a terrible resolve."

          But what I really like is his "sidekick" Royal Marshall's idea: Operation Roach in the Corner.

          :)
      • The DoD have given neat names to operations in the past. It dates to 1964.

        http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/ops/index.html

        Joint Guardian
        Allied Force / Noble Anvil
        Determined Force
        Cobalt Flash
        Shining Hope
        Sustain Hope / Allied Harbour
        Provide Refuge
        Nomad Vigil
        Nomad Endeavor
        Deny Flight
        Decisive Endeavor / Decisive Edge
        Decisive Guard / Deliberate Guard
        Deliberate Forge

        Those are just a few.
      • Why not call it Counterstrike ?

        On second thoughts that's a bad idea; someone's already got the game rights to that already !!

        When is someone going to release a Quake/Half Life addon pack with Bin Laden lookalike terrorist enemies ?

    • Has it occured to anybody that the names of the operations the US mil uses aren't normally the most eloquent or even intelligent? The name of an op does not necessarily have to relate to what the op is about. My point is, the name is only really there as a point of reference. They could call it Operation Speghetti and Meatballs for all anyone really cares.

      Sorry for the stupid post. It's late.
      • They could call it Operation Speghetti and Meatballs for all anyone really cares.

        How do you tell a mother her son was killed during "Operation Spaghetti & Meatballs"? That's why they have these kind of names, you can't just use something silly, it has to at least sound like it's worth dying for.
      • Can I just make a public request? Next time they might be tempted to give something a silly name like that, can we have an "Operation: You're The Doctor!" please?

        sorry, lame joke, but when a thread has gone this far without it being made I had to, for closure you know.
    • Homeland security? Why the hell not 'Interior' security? It dosen't seem patriotic enough? Maybe the Dept. of Defence should be renamed the Dept. of Crusades!
  • Yeah, whoever uses FP to produce a web page, according to the EULA, is not allowed to remove the "active links" (advertisements ?) from the thing, you may not use it "in connection" with sites that diaparages M$, MSN, MSNBC, etc (note : nothing about those companies peoples, though).

    More interesting : you may not use it and infringe ANY state, federal, international laws ! Woooah, given that it's nearly impossible not infringe any law somewhere, that would be a real feat !

    Last but not least : you may not promote pr0n ! Yeah, sure, what do you think most porn site webmasters are using ?

    • Yeah, sure, what do you think most porn site webmasters are using ?

      Erm, paper towels?

    • Yeah, sure, what do you think most porn site webmasters are using ?


      Actually, PHP is quite popular in the net-pr0n world. It makes sense, too. It's cheap and quick, like the content. It's low maintenance, as well.

      I was watching a show one time (I forget what it was called, some business show, I think) that had a story about Danni Ashe (sp?). She said that she started her popular site on a Linux box in her bedroom and did the administration herself. I thought that was pretty cool...

      ObStandardDisclaimer: Oh, and I know all of this because, er, a friend told me, yeah! :-)*
      • I was watching a show one time (I forget what it was called, some business show, I think) that had a story about Danni Ashe (sp?). She said that she started her popular site on a Linux box in her bedroom and did the administration herself. I thought that was pretty cool...

        Dude, you forgot the links! If you ever wanted to get modded up as informative, this was the posting to include the relevant links :-)

        • It's cheap and quick, like the content.
        Geez no need to bash the pr0nstars.

    • Did you even read the EULA? (Score:4, Informative)

      by Carnage4Life ( 106069 ) on Thursday September 20, 2001 @07:23PM (#2328218) Homepage Journal
      Yeah, whoever uses FP to produce a web page, according to the EULA, is not allowed to remove the "active links" (advertisements ?) from the thing, you may not use it "in connection" with sites that diaparages M$, MSN, MSNBC, etc (note : nothing about those companies peoples, though).

      The first paragraph in that section reads
      For purposes of this section, the Software means the FrontPage Web components, including the
      MSNBC news headline component, the MSN MoneyCentral Stock Quote component, and the MSN Search component.
      So basically MSFT doesn't want you using their COM objects on sites that perform illegal activities or diss MSFT subsidiaries. This is very different from stating that if you build your site with Front Page then you must conform to those restrictions. As for "active links", these refer to URLs that components may contaion that lead back to MSFT, for instance MSIE ships with links to Hotmail, Windows Update, and Windows Media Player while Netscape ships with links to AOL and Real. All that section is saying is that if you reuse their components then you shouldn't change the links, seems straight forward enough to me.
    • I had an idea and I wonder what people think of it. Ok, I have two.

      1. I want to make a hardcore anti MS page full of illegal comments (slander, libel, whatever), make it with FrontPage, put the Made my Frontpage logo on it and then send a link to MS stating "HI, I found a web page disparriaging MS and it was made with FrontPage.. and I think I made it."

      2. I want to make a web site with FrontPage praising the business practices of MS as quite fair, hippy-esque, etc. BUT trash their software as pure garbage, second rate, etc. Then of course, report it to MS.

      I wonder how long a cease and desist letter would take to arrive in the mail?

  • From the section referred to in the article:

    For purposes of this section, the Software means the FrontPage Web components, including the MSNBC news headline component, the MSN MoneyCentral Stock Quote component, and the MSN Search component.

    Not having used FrontPage in general and any of these "web components" in particular, I don't want to draw any conclusions, but it doesn't seem like the restrictions covered in the section would come into play if you just use FrontPage as a WYSIWYG editor to design your site.

    • Having used FrontPage somewhere in a dark past, I can qualify that - you can use FP to design whatever type of site you like, just don't use the "web components" (lol) in any manner that MS doesn't agree with.
    • Yes, clearly the EULA does not refer to the editing and publishing capabilities of FrontPage.

      It seems like that's fairly standard for any company. I doubt you can use the Coca-Cola logo on a site which disparages Coca-Cola, either. Using the FrontPage web components explicitly named in the EULA would be exactly the same thing, and IMO Microsoft - or any other company - has the right to protect its property. Besides, if you want to make a site which disparages a company, why would you want to use their components in the first place?

      The restriction in the EULA about not using those components on sites which violate laws makes sense as well. What company would not want to have such language to fall back on if its very identifiable property were to be featured on a site promoting illegal or unsavory activity?

      Imagine that (for example) Red Hat's snappy logo were to show up on, say, Stormfront. Big huge "This White Nationalist website brought to you by Red Hat Linux!" Imagine that Red Hat didn't want to be associated with Stormfront. If there were no legal language to fall back on which stated that using the logo would be a violation of the license for the distribution, there would be no way other than politely asking to remove the logo from the site. Admittedly, a logo is not a "Web component", but notice that only those web components which would directly connect to Microsoft content -- thereby associating the site on which they appeared with Microsoft -- are explicitly referenced.

      • Besides, if you want to make a site which disparages a company, why would you want to use their components in the first place?

        Satire?

      • Besides, if you want to make a site which disparages a company, why would you want to use their components in the first place?


        A news site, run by pro-M$ people in general cannot use these componenets as they occasionally need to run a story that's not so pro-M$ as can be.

    • FrontPage Web components refer to 'widgets' of fununtionality that can be dropped into a site.

      They do not refer to front page itself


      IE, In front page you can INSERT => Web Component => MSNBC News.


      This gives you a part in your web page that actually displays HTML content from the MSNBC site!
      Surely it is fair that if you are using MSNBC dynamic content you page, you can't go along and defame the same content.

      • Surely it is fair that if you are using MSNBC dynamic content you page, you can't go along and defame the same content.

        You are full of crap. This is known as criticism, which is well-accepted in the world by almost anyone who is not receiving it.

  • (Note: it took 3 minutes to get this comment through the "postersubj compression filter". WTF? Apparently, "Enough is Enough" is not an allowable subject field.)

    This Microsoft cr*p is ridiculous.

    It is now the time for anyone and everyone who spends a significant amount of money on Microsoft products to seriously evaluate their options (i.e. consider open-source and related software products).

    From product activation to (fill in the blank) to this latest EULA fiasco, I think most people have had just about enough.
    • From product activation to (fill in the blank) to this latest EULA fiasco, I think most people have had just about enough.

      Make that people on slashdot have had just about enough. The vast majority of the population don't notice or care about Microsoft's abuses, and if you think otherwise, you've been hanging around geeks too much. Sad but true.

      - j
      • The vast majority of the population don't notice or care about Microsoft's abuses,....


        And sheep don't care about the fact that they are eventually going to be slaughtered and eaten because they just don't know it's going to happen. They're perfectly content to munch on the nice green grass of today.

    • Or make that, government bureaucracies haven't had enough. Who do you think is the biggest purchaser of Microsoft products? Its not even necessary purchases most of the time. I know companies that still use Win 3.11 in places because they dont want to upgrade and have to upgrade.

      Governments dont seem to mind shelling out big bucks everytime a new version on MS Office comes out. Companies have to try to make a profit and can't afford to do this. Governments dont have to make any kind of profit and seem to care much less about where the money goes. They spend the public's money, not theirs -- why should they care?

      Hopefully more will wake up and start using alternatives.
  • Who cares about "You may not use the Software in connection with any site that disparages Microsoft, MSN, MSNBC, Expedia or their products or services"? The phrase that caught my eye was "or promote...pornography." So the only businesses that actually make money on the internet are now barred from using Microsoft's web server? Ignore your largest, best funded customer base -- great idea, BillG!

    Hmmm, I wonder if the porn shops will soon have more openings for Linux folks... My wife wouldn't like it, but I think it would be a great work environment ;-)

    • So the only businesses that actually make money on the internet are now barred from using Microsoft's web server?

      Sigh. You're quite wrong. Let me list the ways:

      1. FrontPage != IIS. This bears repeating, so -- FrontPage != IIS.
      2. The EULA in question applies to FrontPage. In fact, it doesn't even apply to FrontPage the application, but the FrontPage Web Components
      3. That means that you can't use the MSN Stock Ticker, the MSNBC headlines, Expedia maps, and so on.
      4. However, when was the last time you actually went to a porn page for stock quotes, news headlines, driving directions or hotel accomodations, etc?

      You're simply jerking your knee. The original story is now hours old, and many of the comments have made it abundantly clear that this is not a restriction on the usage of FrontPage as an IDE, or IIS as a web server, or Windows 2000 as a server, or whatever other Slashdot-ism you want to bring up.
      • > However, when was the last time you actually went to a porn page for stock quotes, news headlines, driving directions or hotel accomodations, etc?

        "I only read it for the articles".
      • The EULA in question applies to FrontPage. In fact, it doesn't even apply to FrontPage the application, but the FrontPage Web Components

        I suppose it depends on what you deem to be "the Web components." This provision is very vaguely worded, probably on purpose. Microsoft says that it includes the MSN Stock Ticker, the MSNBC headlines, Expedia maps, and so on. However, where do you draw this line? Perhaps FrontPage extensions such as the Forms component (which displays HTML forms and then e-mails their contents to a specified e-mail address without writing any code), could be construed as being a "Web Component." Microsoft's definition of Web components does not specifically state what this includes and what this excludes, again, probably on purpose.

      • "However, when was the last time you actually went to a porn page for stock quotes, news headlines, driving directions or hotel accomodations, etc?"

        You haven't heard of Naked News [nakednews.com]? (Warning: nudity -- I'm not sure how bad the main page is, since I'm using lynx at the moment. But it's not a hoax.) It's big enough that it actually got regular television news coverage when they were looking for male anchors to balance out the cast.

    • Yeah, this is just great. So when MS wants to attack the GPL and Linux they just say "But but but, we're protectiing the children from pr0n!"
    • Just remember that on your CV, you spent time working at "a high bandwidth e-commerce site with high availability requirements".
    • The six nurses in my family tell me that it is impossible for any people except hermaphrodites to have sexual relations with themselves. Nevertheless, I do expect the people in Microsoft that wrote, promoted, or agreed with this EULA to try diligently.
  • It appears the last quickies article was posted Wednesday March 28, @05:59PM. Come on now, there has to have been a lot of little cool stories since then. I miss the quickies. They had a lot of the funniest, coolest, weirdest tidbits on /.

    Anybody know why they have ceased to exist? Taco, hemos, et al you out there?
  • I found out about Kalliera(sp) and immediately downloaded it. Imagine, being able to play real arcade games, with other people, over the internet! Wow!! I install, join a server, and plop. Nothing. The only games being played, and I mean the only games, are the dreadfully dull fighting games. I try some of the other servers, and the same thing is going on there. I repeat this process many times over the span of a few weeks, and I don't find *anything*. I mean, not one single time did I find anyone playing any real arcade games. I think once I saw someone playing Puzzle Fighter, which tries to fool people into thinking it's a fighting game, and evidently succeeded in this case.
  • For those wondering where Graeme's claim about the framerates were, that was in an earlier update [webdog.org]. You can find it at QuakeFinger [planetquake.com] as well.
  • MAME is source-available (though not GPL) and is ported to many different architectures. Linux, DOS, Windows, Mac, even digital cameras.

    Kaillera is a closed-source SDK for Windows only, therefore it has a much more limited appeal/application than MAME itself.
  • Of course they can. They can limit whatever speech through their medium that they want. Republican talk show hosts like Rush Limbaugh don't have to allow liberals (or atleast, the smart ones) on their show if they don't want to. So what do liberals do when they don't have their voice heard on the EIB network? They go elsewhere.

    And frontpage is nowhere near a monopoly, and there are tons of alternatives, so the ability to have speech is not limited through a medium, just one avenew out of several similiar avenews for expressing free speech in one medium is limited.

    Restrictions like this should make a lot of people consider using alternatives. The more people that move away from microsoft products, the better. And if microsoft is going to give people good reason to switch, I'm not going to complain.

    F-bacher
    • The next MS EULA should say anyone can use this peice of software as long as their skin isn't black. It's a free market what's wrong with that?

      Or perhaps we could have the "no developers" license? You can only use this peice of software if you've never written a program longer than 2000 lines of code. (This would be for the purpose of stopping reverse engineering of course...)
      • I think the rendering of services cannot be stopped on the basis of sex, race, sexual orientation, or physical ability (aka being disabled). But of you do it for another reason (such as for being a hater), it is legal.

        And hey, if companies want to start making bigoted licenses, I'm all for it! Think of all the people would migrate from Microsoft to even half-assed alternatives if Microsoft admitted openly that they discriminate on the basis of sex. I think we've gotten to the point that big companies will have trouble getting away with such open discrimination without an economiuc hit. It's the smaller businesses that are more likely to not have their racists practices uncovered and blared on every major network news station.

        F-bacher
    • I can't actually claim to know anything about contract law, and EULAs seem not to have much validity anyway so maybe none of this matters.

      However, if EULA are already on shaky ground, putting something like this in is even shakier. This clause has far-reaching implications for the user -- where other such clauses are directly attached to the product, such as not allowing benchmarks, this relates to content which is probably not created by the same people (or even companies) that chose and installed the software. While such a clause might be enforceable in another situation, I can't imagine the legal system is so fucked up that it would be enforcable because someone clicked "I agree".

      Of course, legal enforcement is probably not on the minds of the MS lawyers anyway. This clause gives them an opportunity to harrass.

  • I would avoid Reptialian Ambassador.
    You wouldn't want anyone confusing Mitchell Baker with a M$ sales rep.
  • I don't know the facts, and I am not a lawyer, but ...

    I seem to recall something about if you apply restrictions to the content of what passes through your channels, than you are giving what passes through the nod.

    In the case of MS, by prohibiting particular content being made and published using their product, then they are leaving themselves open to aiding people who make, say, porn or hate pages, using Frontpage. And because their licences prohibit some content, then they are party to what is let through.

    Hmmm - just a thought ....

    • you're thinking of 'common carrier' status. It relates to telecommunications companies and has nothing to do with software.
  • Hotmail has a similar "Conditions of Use" statement in their How to Link to Hotmail [passport.com] secion, excerpted:
    You may not display the Logo on any site that disparages Microsoft or its products or services, infringes any Microsoft intellectual property or other rights, or violates any state, federal or international law.

    This is probably fair enough for Hotmail, and Frontpage too -- how many Slashdotters would like the see the /. logo used to villify the site across the web?

    However, as for any content generated by the program in question... strip out the META tags and M$ junk it includes in HTML files, and voila! "Could've been any program that done this, guv'ner..."
    • The problem is that it makes it so you can't praise MS for something on one hand - but criticize them on another.

      You can't say "I really like Hotmail - it's a great service [logo with link] - but not all MS products are as tasty - Frontpage, quite frankly sucks - it produces big, bloated HTML that doesn't work right in any browser but MSIE." -- even though the two products are unrelated in your conjecture, other than the fact they're made by the same company - the EULA prevents you from saying things like this if you use the logo, even if that use is legitimate.

      (note: I don't like Hotmail - it's a spambed - I just used it as an example - I should have used their mice as the example instead - they're the one thing MS seems to be able to do RIGHT)
    • You may not display the Logo on any site that disparages Microsoft or its products or services, infringes any Microsoft intellectual property or other rights, or
      violates any state, federal or international law.

      Hey, wait a minute...are any of MS's sites closely tied enough to their illegal monopolistic activities that they violated their own license terms? That would be hilarious.

  • Hmm... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by atrowe ( 209484 ) on Thursday September 20, 2001 @08:23PM (#2328345)
    "You shall not convert the news headlines in the MSNBC component into an audio format"

    Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't Win2K come with a program called Narrator that converts text into an audio format. I wonder if we could sue MS for violating the DMCA (circumvention device) using their own software? Thoughts?

    • I wonder if we could sue MS for violating the DMCA

      No, but you probably could for violating ADA.
    • Um, I don't think that counts as circumvention. Potentially breach-of-license, but that's the user's responsibility (if part of the license agreement is "Thou shalt not break this CD into little bits with a hammer" you're not allowed to sue the hammer company if you do, and neither is microsoft)

      > I have no toleranse for stupidity.

      Please tell me that was meant to be ironic.

  • You may not use the software in a connection with any site that disparages Microsoft, MSN, MSNBC, Expedia or their products or services, infrince any intellectual property or other rights of these parties, violate any state federal or international law, or promote racism, hatred, or pornography...

    I like what one poster made fun of [slashdot.org] -- what is Microsoft thinking? Can't make pr0n sites with frontpage? No links that promote racism or hatred?

    This seems a bit much... I dont condone hate groups, nor do I condone racists... but I respect the right they have to have their views. Microsoft is seeming to be letting idealogies determine what a person can do with their product... to ask yourself if this can be done -- think: do you think its ok and legal to sell a product to make web pages with the EULA that "You can not use this to make any page that does not have only the words 'Microsoft is Cool' on it" and advertise it otherwise? Someone buys this product (for example) for the sole purpose to let other people know what a complete and total idiotic racist that they are, and then they find that the EULA that they did not see until after they installed the product prohibited it. They can't return it -- (open box software), and they cant use...

    What can we do?
    • They tried their damndest to get the Church of Satan to remove "Made with a Mac" or an apple logo removed from their pages. [churchofsatan.com]

      At least MS is coming outright and tell users what they can't do, as opposed to picking on certain groups because it might upset the herd.

      Most americans couldn't care less about free speech and the corporations know this, and now they're exploiting it.

      • They tried their damndest to get the Church of Satan to remove "Made with a Mac" or an apple logo removed from their pages. [churchofsatan.com]

        I guess MegaCorps just "invest" so much money into "building brand image" (infecting our culture with distorted perceptions) that anything that "damages"/exposes that "image"/distortion, is a threat to their bottom line. But we already know this.

        I mean, they can't have people walking into a store and asking, "say, where's your Satan Machine..err...Apple computers, please?"

        But while sales are good for business and the economy, advertising is basically a "lie" to alter your perceptions into making you buy something you don't need... I mean, if you needed it, you would just buy it, right? I mean, we could just have a "what's new" page, listing new products, and that would be it. No bare flesh, no scenic landscapes...

        But I don't mind the adverts. If people want to buy an Apple so they can feel "Different", then fine, they've just paid to buy themselves into an association with a distorted image... ie. they've paid to "become" the advert lifestyle (maybe in the future, all films will be adverts, populated by people who buy the product, along with a few stars... "Buy a Clio and win a trip on location with the French woman, as she drives you to a scenic spot in her Clio...")

        What sickens me, and you, is when business thinks it has the right to interfere with my opinions and rights to voice those opinions.

        If business wants to build it's whole strategy to rely heavily on it's fragile brand image, then that's it's own fault. And if that image gets "damaged" by accidental association with the "wrong" things, then that's just too bad.

        I mean, you don't look at a Wolkswagen and think, "bast*rd evil german nazi car", do you? Instead you try to find out about the reliability, the build quality, mileage, etc.

        Companies *should* be encouraging consumers to understand quality issues, so that we'll demand quality and workers can have a better sense of satisfaction in their productive labours.

    • promote racism, hatred, or pornography...

      Well, maybe it's okay as long as you are just showing pornography. This isn't promotion, after all. So "Come See Barely Legal Chicks" sites would be banned, but just no-frill hardcore porn pages would be A-OK.

      Similarly, maybe this means it's okay to make a site saying "I hate, I am racist, and here's a picture of me naked", as long as you aren't saying that other people should feel the same.

      Someone buys this product (for example) for the sole purpose to let other people know what a complete and total idiotic racist that they are, and then they find that the EULA that they did not see until after they installed the product prohibited it. They can't return it -- (open box software), and they cant use...
      I've wondered about going through the entire purchase-refuse-EULA-get-return-denied process, and then go ahead and find something interesting in the EULA that I can then break (since they haven't held up their end of the contract, I thus wouldn't be bound).

      Maybe I should purchase a copy of FrontPage, try to return it, fail, and then make a particularly offensive page with it, with a big "made with FrontPage" logo on it.

      The other way would be civil disobedience -- buy this sort of software on a credit card, and when you can't return it get the credit card company to stop payment. I've never done that sort of thing with a credit card, so I don't konw how hard it is. Admittedly you wouldn't be going into the transaction in good faith either. I'd be curious if someone else has tried such a thing.

  • Well folks, here it is, in all it's glory, straight from the horse's ass:

    "You may not use the Software in connection with any site that disparages Microsoft, MSN, MSNBC, Expedia or their products or services, infringe any intellectual property or other rights of these parties, violate any state, federal or international law, or promote racism, hatred, or pornography. You shall not convert the news headlines in the MSNBC component into an audio format for redistribution to audio users. You agree to immediately remove the Software from Your Web Site if you do not abide by any of these restrictions after notice.
    Wow. I didn't believe it was true at first, but it looks like it is. I'm shocked, seriously. I didn't know they would be this blatent about their horrible licensing practices.

    I'm normally not a MS basher. Hell, I've been an MCSE for over 2 years (both the NT4 and recently the 2K track)...but this kind of stuff makes me happy that I'm making the switch to Linux and open source.

    --SC

  • Sorry if this is off topic... but it's been *very* hard to program this last week. I feel like I have this enormous burden on my chest. I live in a Democracy, and I feel I must now pay for my freedom with time, energy, and concern. If you feel the same way, please comment on this draft to the President regarding his speech this evening. If you don't feel this way, please don't mark me as Troll or Flame-Bait. Instead write your own letter. Call me an idealist if you wish... but somebody's got to do it. Thank you.

    ...

    Dear President,

    Given that you have resolved to take actions against Afghanistan and that our Congress has passed the Authorization for Use of Military Force, I humbly offer a few suggestions which I hope you will consider.

    0. We need more compassionate talk about those innocent refugees who are ravaged by war in Afghanistan. Identify with them and the Arabic world will follow you. Give these people hope and help them rebuild their society. Only then will terrorists be unwelcome.

    1. Make it clear that we are temporary guests who are visiting to restore basic freedoms of speech, assembly, religion, and self-determination. Clearly point out how Muslims, Christians, and Jews peacefully practice their religions in our country due to the separation of church and state.

    2. For every military dollar, spend two dollars on relief efforts in Afghanistan and other "at risk" areas where dissent is evident. To really fight terrorism, we must give hope back to the citizens of Afghanistan. Use this to rally the Arabic peoples of other nations to support us so that the terrorism does not just move to another country.

    3. Declare an American media style 'war on mines'. Rally the Arabic world to help rid Afghanistan of its millions of mines. Let this be a known goal of our "invasion". Promise on our nation's flag that we will not leave mines when we go.

    4. While "war against terrorism" rages, carry on a separate 'war on illiteracy' in the Refugee camps. Build schools. Teach them Math. Teach them Science. Teach them Humanities (esp. Middle-Eastern History). Teach them Business. Teach them Agriculture.

    5. Help rebuild their cities by providing knowledge, food, housing, supplies, and encouragement. Help them rebuild their countryside by exploring what crops work best in their climate and how to build an agricultural system to support their peoples.

    6. Help them form a democratic government. Be clear that we are not Imperialistic. Afghanistan is their country, and will remain their country.

    7. Above all, make it known to the Afghan people and the whole world that we are there to remove terrorists and the government which harbors those terrorists. Make it clear we will eventually leave. And make it clear that when we do leave, their country will be in better condition than when we arrive.

    I close with the recently spoken words of the Holy Father, Pope John Paul II:

    "I pray that this inhuman act will awaken in the hearts of all the world's peoples a firm resolve to reject the ways of violence, to combat everything that sows hatred and division within the human family."

    "[May God] help all to resist the temptation to hatred and violence, and to dedicate themselves to the service of justice and peace."

    Sincerely Yours,

    Clark C. Evans

    • That sums up my feelings exactly. Your average Afghani has very little. The per capita GDP is something like US$800. A year. As Bush pointed out last night, we're already the largest source of aid for Afghanistan. But we ought to send more. And not money that can be re-appropriated, but goods they can use.

      It is traditional, anyway, for us to do something like that after we whack a country. Usually we have the war first, then rebuild the economy. (ref. Germany, Japan) Maybe this time we could just skip the war and go right on to the re-building.

  • Check this out:
    You may not use the Software in connection with any site that disparages Microsoft, MSN, MSNBC, Expedia or their products or services, infringe any intellectual property or other rights of these parties, violate any state, federal or international law, or promote racism, hatred , or pornography .

    That's just obtuse.
  • People still using FrontPage? Crap, I thought everyone with a shred of self-respect was using DreamWeaver...

    Dont complain about FrontPages licensing issues, just dont use it and dont buy it...

    Anyway, anything, under any platform is better than FrontPage (and InterDev is pretty sucky too)...
  • "You may not use the Software in connection with any site that disparages Microsoft, MSN, MSNBC, Expedia or their products or services"

    Basically they're saying that you can't use Frontpage to build frontpagesucks.com. . .

Slashdot Top Deals

"I've seen the forgeries I've sent out." -- John F. Haugh II (jfh@rpp386.Dallas.TX.US), about forging net news articles

Close