Comment Re: Application developers want Systemd features? (Score 0) 212
Great point! What features!
Comment Re: What's the big deal? (Score 0) 165
Here. Here!
Comment Re:2017 is the year (Score 0) 123
This year we lost:
DMOZ - http://www.dmoz.org/
Advogato - http://advogato redirects to https://web.archive.org/web/20170715120119/http://advogato.org/ . [*Forever as a journeyer in limbo]
(now) LinuxJournal.
Comment Sorry to hear it (Score 0) 73
I really wish he could accept this award in person. If we can't do anything, next best...someone accepts it for him.
Journal Journal: STOP SOPA Blackouts
Thanks for making this... the best day ever!
Comment Patents (Score 0) 75
There are certain standards that contain patented algorithms. We can not comply with industry standards without infringing on these patented algorithms. Thus we are unable to compete.
You may try to invoke the Sherman Act, however, this may not work as that patent may not be seen as an attempt to monopolize but an attempt to protect work.
* Section 2 of the Sherman Act makes it unlawful for a company to "monopolize, or attempt to monopolize," trade or commerce. As that law has been interpreted, it is not necessarily illegal for a company to have a monopoly or to try to achieve a monopoly position. The law is violated only if the company tries to maintain or acquire a monopoly position through unreasonable methods. For the courts, a key factor in determining what is unreasonable is whether the practice has a legitimate business justification.
* Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act outlaws "unfair methods of competition" but does not define unfair. The Supreme Court has ruled that violations of the Sherman Act also are violations of Section 5, but Section 5 covers some practices that are beyond the scope of the Sherman Act. It is the FTC's job to enforce Section 5.
While some may collect royalties on software, we don't. Not that the rep would care, but we can't pay royalties on an algorithm. Thus we might be expected to stop distributing and developing code.
This brings a level of monopoly to the patent holder as we can not compete. Of course, we might be able to hack around some patented algorithm, but when it comes down to a patent suit, how can we fight it?
Unless the developer is independently wealthy, this person will fold. The cost of a defense is well into the 100s of thousands of dollars.
You may try to invoke the Sherman Act, however, this may not work as that patent may not be seen as an attempt to monopolize but an attempt to protect work.
* Section 2 of the Sherman Act makes it unlawful for a company to "monopolize, or attempt to monopolize," trade or commerce. As that law has been interpreted, it is not necessarily illegal for a company to have a monopoly or to try to achieve a monopoly position. The law is violated only if the company tries to maintain or acquire a monopoly position through unreasonable methods. For the courts, a key factor in determining what is unreasonable is whether the practice has a legitimate business justification.
* Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act outlaws "unfair methods of competition" but does not define unfair. The Supreme Court has ruled that violations of the Sherman Act also are violations of Section 5, but Section 5 covers some practices that are beyond the scope of the Sherman Act. It is the FTC's job to enforce Section 5.
While some may collect royalties on software, we don't. Not that the rep would care, but we can't pay royalties on an algorithm. Thus we might be expected to stop distributing and developing code.
This brings a level of monopoly to the patent holder as we can not compete. Of course, we might be able to hack around some patented algorithm, but when it comes down to a patent suit, how can we fight it?
Unless the developer is independently wealthy, this person will fold. The cost of a defense is well into the 100s of thousands of dollars.
Slashdot Top Deals
And on the seventh day, He exited from append mode.
