Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:Good for US economy (Score 1) 617

I am opposed because it moves the burden of policing software licence compliance to businesses who may have little or no control over their overseas suppliers and who are not in the business of law enforcement.

It doesn't affect me personally. I live in New Zealand. In addition to my full time job (linesman for the local phone company) I also have a small organic market garden. Our accounts are done in OpenOffice running on Linux, so no compliance issues for us. In any case, we supply local supermarkets and do not export to the USA.

Comment Re:Good for US economy (Score 1) 617

Purchasing products made by a company that is out of compliance with their software licences is not the same as purchasing stolen goods.

I think there are similarities, namely the ones that I highlighted

This is where I have to disagree.

Scenario 1: I buy bolts from a manufacture that has stolen the raw materials (eg steel) in order to make the bolts.

Scenario 2: I buy bolts from a manufacture that uses stolen software to track their stock.

You are lumping these two scenarios together. In reality they are totally different.

Yes I agree I should return bolts made from stolen materials, but the second scenario is nothing at all like that. If you are the legal owner of said stock tracking software and you come to me demanding redress for the actions of the manufacturer, with whom my only relationship is buying bolts to use in my product, I think you can guess where I'd tell you to go. Any law that lets you go after me in the second scenario is lacking in common sense.

Comment Re:Good for US economy (Score 1) 617

And if the non-US supplier provides fake software audit certs, that should let the US company off the hook, because the US company has then acted in good faith.

It would probably afford some possibilities for suing / reneging on payments to those foreign suppliers. If I purchase stolen goods, I still have to give them back when the police show up, but I can seek redress from the person that sold me those goods. If I were knowingly receiving stolen goods, then I am liable myself however.

Purchasing products made by a company that is out of compliance with their software licences is not the same as purchasing stolen goods.

And of course the law should apply to all licence violations, including GPL violations. If Microsoft is doing this for the right reasons, surely they would extend the same protection to software vendors who choose to use Open Source licencing models. No? Ah, I see, Microsoft give their true motives away.

You seem to be suggesting that MS should go out and sue companies that violate GPL licences. What has that got to do with them? Do you go across town and sue people for actions they commit against people you don't even know and have nothing to do with you?

I'm not sure if your lack of comprehension is deliberate, so I'll give you the benefit of the doubt.
I'm saying that if Microsoft is going to sponsor a law protecting copyright holders, then there should not be exceptions in that law for certain classes of copyright holders.
I am not saying that Microsoft should sue GPL violators. I am saying that a Microsoft sponsored law change should not exclude GPL vendors from suing under the same circumstances that Microsoft can sue.

Comment Re:Considering how software licensing works curren (Score 1) 617

I don't believe it's physically possible to use commercial software in any but the smallest of organisations and at the same time be 100% correct in your licensing of it.

Except by over-licencing, buying more cover than you actually need.

If you're prepared to accept this, then laws such as this start to sound dangerously close to legalised extortion : "Nice company you've got here. Be a shame if anything were to happen to it."

Exactly.

Comment Re:"An offer you cannot refuse" gamut (Score 1) 617

How difficult is it to show that the software used is pirated or not? It is not like auditing thousands of pages of financial records. The company just has to show that it acquired a genuine license from Microsoft.

The law isn't that unreasonable

It would be more reasonable if the law provided the same protection to Open Source licence-holders.
So far none of the pro-microsoft comments on this article address this issue, which is adding weight to the astroturfing theory.
I'm not saying that you are astroturfing. I'm just waiting for your reply that you agree or disagree that Open Source licence-holders should also be protected. Just because I release software with an Open Source licence, doesn't mean you can mis-appropriate my code. Open Source licences have conditions too and the authors of the code retain their rights.

Comment Re:More complicated than a carbon tax. (Score 1) 617

I haven't seen any of the /.ers who take Microsoft's side on this issue address the anomaly that Open Source licence-holders are not given the same protection by this law that is given to Microsoft.
Until one of the suspected astroturfers posts a comment supporting the removal of the Open Source exception, they will remain suspect.
 

Comment Re:Good for US economy (Score 1) 617

And if the non-US supplier provides fake software audit certs, that should let the US company off the hook, because the US company has then acted in good faith.
And of course the law should apply to all licence violations, including GPL violations. If Microsoft is doing this for the right reasons, surely they would extend the same protection to software vendors who choose to use Open Source licencing models. No? Ah, I see, Microsoft give their true motives away.

If any of my representatives sign a trade deal with USA that involves adopting stupid American laws here, I will bitch-slap that representative until the cops drag me away.

Comment Re:Good for US economy (Score 1) 617

Huh, unfair competition laws? Don't you think it's only fair if companies can't buy from companies using pirated software who sell at lower price because frankly they don't need to pay as much costs as lawful companies?

If I contract out some work to an overseas company, am I expected to police the software they use internally?
And even if that has some merit, the exception for Open Source licence violations exposes this for what it is.
Thank God I don't live in America.

As soon as I saw this article come up on /. I wondered how long will it take for paid astroturfers to put a spin on this.

Comment Re:Quality (Score 2) 113

I wonder how the quality of the BB ecosystem will go over time though, sure it's a boon to have access to all the Android apps but will people develop native PlayBook apps knowing that they could just develop an Android one that runs on the PB *and* on Android devices?

I think this was one of IBM's mistakes with OS/2 Warp. It ran Win3.1 and DOS apps so well that no-one made native apps for OS/2.

Comment Re:My Face (Score 2) 344

This is why I demand a copyright release up front from any photographer I pay to take pictures. I also demand all photos taken, not just the ones the photographer thinks I might like. It costs more, but it's worth it to me.

I did this for my wedding photos in 2002. I shopped around for photographers who would do this and the only one who agreed was actually cheaper than the others and took very good photos. The first few that I approached laughed in my face and smugly told me no-one in their industry would do it. I have since advised all my friends as they got engaged to shop around for a photographer who will let you have all the photos (and raw files) and release copyright to you.

Comment Re:Updated TOS (Score 1) 313

There's also a built-in assumption here, that the z% will want Windows -- but it's not a stretch -- not everyone has a nerd at hand to install Linux and configure it to make it work for them.

A few years ago my brother, who is not a computer nerd but reasonably self motivated as a user, downloaded a linux distro and asked me to help install it.

I visited him for the weekend (he lives in a different city) and sat in his living room watching TV with my nephews while he tried to see how far he could get. I told him to give me a yell if he got stuck.

When he finally called me over to the computer (one TV episode later, so probably about half an hour) he was finished.

Not every non-nerd needs a nerd to install Linux and configure it to make it work for them.

Comment Re:My grandmother is one of them... (Score 0) 301

I do something similar, but not to the same extent. My date of birth on Facebook is the 1st of January 1970. I was born in the 70s so I've given them the right decade for their demographic stats out of courtesy. I have my first name and my last initial as my FB name. I don't allow access to 3rd party apps.

I don't friend anyone connected with my workplace and I don't post anything that could get me fired if someone from HR stumbled across it and linked it to me. I also don't friend people who are not connected to me offline.

Good lecture though. I will link to your post when advising others.

Comment Re:do it mozilla. (Score 2) 284

Id like to throttle the person who told her about it, because Ive become customer support.

Then stop. Unless you're getting something out of it, why be free support for friends and roommates? I'll help people once for twice as a favour, but after that I play dumb and make like I've exhausted my knowledge on the matter and refer them to a professional.

Slashdot Top Deals

Real computer scientists like having a computer on their desk, else how could they read their mail?

Working...