The point is not who is the end user. The point is what constitutes a contract in general.
The point is not who is the end user. The point is what constitutes a contract in general.
This type of thinking is akin to straightening the ship that's sinking on one side by drilling a whole and sinking its other side too. How about enforce laws equally for everyone to start with? Would Sony be contractually liable if you sent them your own version of EULA in the [e]mail? Would you be able to take that piece of [e]mail to the court and argue against Sony? How about your bank? Facebook? Amazon?
Well, it's a good thing Apple thought of this in advance for you and designed the phone with an easy, inexpensive user replaceable battery.
Actually no, the statute of limitations applies to regular citizens also.
It can be ignored when convenient.
Not the same at all. There are millions of other books to choose from because Rowling's does own all the printing presses.
It is the same. Re-read my post. I said a monopoly on Harry Potter, not a monopoly on books.
MS has monopoly on Windows = JK Rowling has monopoly on Harry Potter. Great.
MS Windows has 95% market share in the consumer desktop market and is abusing its monopoly position to undercut and eliminate products/companies in OS and other areas with anti-competitive practices = JK Rowling sells/licenses 95% of all end-consumer books and is somehow using this dominant position in the market to undercut and eliminate book, magazine and newspaper publishers, for example, by coercing the printing/publishing/pressing equipment manufacturers to not allow printing any/most content from other writers, or she will dramatically increase her Harry Potter licensing price, making those manufacturers unable to offer Harry Potter books at existing prices, effectively shutting down their business (because that's effectively shutting out 95% of their business).
Sure it would be the same thing if that's what was happening.
I don't disagree with you - I just blame Apple. It seems like they should write their buggy driver in userspace.
Unless, of course, he is required by his employer / labor union / etc. to turn over his hash after voting. This IS a major problem.
Government tracking of who voted how is a bad idea in general. If you get a hash that identifies you and tracks your vote in the database. Later if the database is questioned for any reason, anyone looking into the data can find out how you voted. The data would also be available for sale under the table, and it's just asking for trouble in general.
The way it works now and the way it should work is when you vote, your vote enters the pool of other votes and can never ever be tied back to you in any way.
Since Microsoft don't distribute Arora with IIS, there is no possible argument that they have to abide by Arora's licence, and this is no analogy to situtations where people are distributing other people's licences, and asking if they don't have to follow it.
Microsoft, if they wanted to, could distribute Arora under GPL and IIS under their own license in one software package - one has nothing to do with the other, besides both of them using the HTTP protocol.
Can the authors of Arora distribute IIS in violation of its licence? Of course they can't. Why is it a different rule for the GPL?
Because GPL is not violated if all you share with the GPLed program is a protocol.
Exactly. I don't understand the issue. It will look like this:
[ (GPL library) - > (GPL program) ] (protocol) (non-GPL program that doesn't use the GPL library)
What protocol is doesn't matter. It can be a standard I/O, local socket, or a network protocol like FTP/HTTP/etc. Can a GPL web browser like Arora communicate with a proprietary web server like IIS? Of course it can!
If you asked RMS, he would have you offer everything under GPL, but that's the choice you can make on your own. It has pretty much nothing to do with the GPL library.
Russia gave out Russian passports like candy to South Ossetians, then declared most of them were Russians - well... Duh.
Here's how to do it if you are the U.S.:
1. Hand out U.S. passports to Mexicans on the U.S. border regions (they'll gladly take them)
2. Create/subsidize pro U.S. movement in those areas (easy)
3. Once the "movement" gains ground, have the movement elected into government forcefully - kick out and burn down every Mexican's house who doesn't agree with it; then ask the "elected" government to declare independence
4. "Protect" them when Mexicans try to secure their border
It's not a rocket science really.
Besides, I didn't see anyone coming to rescue for Chechnya when Russia "invaded" it for similar (and many other worse) reasons.
They obviously changed the stuff after the story became public and was posted everywhere. You can probably still find screenshots if you search for them.
And "is windows expensive" returns just plain anti-Windows results. "why is windows expensive" (eliminating the 'so') returns more neutral responses. This is just a difference in the search algorithms. I wonder how many phrases were tried before the authors obtained suitably pro-MS results for their troll.
Getting rid of the "so" yields only 2 relevant results that relate to MS Windows on the first page on #7 and #8 spots, putting several results about Macs being expensive above them. Either the "decision engine" is so poor that it can't search for the terms user typed in, or it uses an algorithm to demote search results that reference MS products as being costly.
Hmm... I wonder which one.
Also, I just tried "why windows costs a lot" on bing - the results are similar in that there are no results about MS Windows costing a lot. Mac, Linux games, additional RAM, etc. are all fair game, however.
Not really. Ignoring all "news" results, searching Bing for "why is windows so expensive" on the first page I get:
1. Why are Mac's so expensive
2. Why so expensive - games for Windows Live
This actually talks about why Macs are so expensive - because Apple controls all the hardware, etc.
3. Why are vinyl windows so expensive
Has nothing to do with software, OK
4. Why are windows hosting providers so expensive
5. Why are macbooks so expensive
6. WikiAnswers - why are Apple Macs so expensive
7. Windows Embedded Blog: Why is commercial OSS software so expensive
8. Why are macs so expensive
9. Why are macs so expensive
10. Why fish is so expensive
Using Google search for the same on the first page I get:
1. Why Windows Vista and Office 2007 are so expensive
2. Is Windows getting more expensive? CNET news
3. Windows 7 to be "more expensive" than Vista, XP
4. Writing on the wall: why Windows is so expensive
5. Why are vinyl windows so expensive?
- same non-software result as on Bing, which is OK
6. Omfg Vista Is So Expensive - Windows Vista and Windows 7
7. Why is the IBM thinkpad x301 laptop so expensive with mediocre
8. Why are Macs so expensive? | News | TechRadar UK
9. Gizmodo - The World's Most Expensive Copy of Windows XP - XP
10. FAQs - City of Port Phillip Website
- why is double glazing windows so expensive?
So, while Google mixed in one result for Macs being expensive at the #8 spot, most results are actually about Windows being expensive and relevant to the search query.
In contrast, there are no results from Bing that talk about Windows being expensive - only one about Windows hosting providers being expensive, but most results are about Macs being expensive, and one about commercial OSS being expensive.
This is actually a pretty good job by a "decision engine" - taking the negative search terms about their products and applying them to their competitors products. Cute.
You'd be surprised how many people in the U.S. watch Fox News. In fact, they are very successful here. My personal theory is that U.S. is just like many other countries with large populations (Russia, China, Indonesia come to mind) where people are hungry and very susceptible to be told how to think.
Let me give you a brief overview: this is how it works - everything is deduced and painted in black and white for you; you identify the side you don't like and associate yourself with the other side - everything has 2 sides, you see.
By associating yourself with one side you inherit all labels (e.g. conservative, capitalist, patriotic, etc.) associated with it and are told how the people under the labels on the other side (democrats, liberals, socialists, etc.) are bad. In fact media like Fox News, or radio stations need not provide any factual news for you - all they have to do is spoon-feed you the negative opinions about the other side which is supposed to give you warm fuzzies listening to the guys on your side.
God forbid someone provide a third or fourth point of view on any political subject - that would not easily be allowed on TV. People are taught there are 2 sides to every coin - can you imagine what would happen if there was another point of view that didn't fit the 2-sided theme?! The "news" channels would be losing their audience. On a very rare occasion it happens, they sometimes call it "oh, an interesting angle" and dismiss it as that, continuing their propaganda programming.
Yeah, that's pretty much how it works.
We don't know one millionth of one percent about anything.