Hi all,
Lets say I have developed an GPL'd application and put it on some hardware,
a pda. I then let someone borrow the pda, and NOT giving him/her permission
to take a copy of the application. Must I still give that person the source
code?
If the person pays a smaller amount of money for the time he/she uses the
pda, does the answer from the previous question still apply?
Sincerely,
Fredrik
_________________________________________________________________
The new MSN 8: advanced junk mail protection and 2 months FREE*
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
Hello!
After googling the net without any luck, I hope someone on this list,
could point me to the right place.
I am looking for a paper (possibly in German, Italian or English), which
destimoniates that Free Software is a cultural benefit.
Our local LUG wants to get Free Software acknowledged as cultural
benefit by the local authorities. It's difficult, because of the lack of
knowledge about software and information tecnologies in general. This
makes it difficult to explain the connection to the topic of culture.
Information society seams often just a buzzword, so we are looking for
some documents to enforce our argumentation.
The [1]statement made by Georg on Bookzilla could be a starting point,
but we would need a printable version.
Someone knows about any printable documents we could use?
Happy hacking!
Patrick
p.s. Even statements made by the UNO would be helpfull.
[1] http://www.bookzilla.de/shop/action/magazine?aUrl=90006951&mpid=2129
--
Save software competition, use GNU/Linux and a free Java implementation,
like GNU Classpath (http://www.gnu.org/software/classpath/)!
Also visit http://www.lugbz.org the Linux User Group in South Tirol.
Hello,
I am the Secretary of the Hellenic Linux Users Group(http://www.hellug.gr/)
In an interview given by "Microsoft Hellas
S.A."(http://www.microsoft.com/hellas/) CEO(Mr. Christos Tsagkos) at the
Hellenic Financial Newspaper Naftemporiki(E-WORKING Manazine, Page 4,
Answer to the 4th question - http://www.naftemporiki.gr/[greek only]),
there was an abstract saying, word by word: "Let me start by saying
that, according to a recert reasearch by IDC, Windows is the least
vulnerable operating system, regarding security issues. The research
indicates that there are more than twice number of viruses for Linux
than for Windows". I have searched every recent research from IDC but I
haven't found that information.
What do you advise us to do? We have already contacted IDC and waiting
for a response.
Thank you in advance
Regards
- Giannis Stoilis
Here is the answer...
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: IDC quote
Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2004 14:54:31 -0500
From: Michael Shirer <mshirer(a)idc.com>
To: giannis(a)stoilis.gr
CC: Mathew Heath <mheath(a)idc.com>
Mr. Stoilis,
IDC has not produced any research that supports the claims made by Mr.
Tsagkos, nor do we believe his claims to be true.
Respectfully,
Michael Shirer
Corporate Communications Manager
IDC
---------------------- Forwarded by Mathew Heath/UK/Europe/IDC on
04/02/2004 10:12 ---------------------------
IDC Support <idc_support(a)idc.com> on 04/02/2004 08:36:15
To: mheath(a)idc.com
cc:
Subject: Europe - From: Sage
Contact Permission to Quote
Info_RequestReqd: In an interview given by "Microsoft Hellas S.A."(
http://www.microsoft.com/hellas/) CEO(Mr. Christos Tsagkos) at the Hellenic
Financial Newspaper Naftemporiki(E-WORKING Manazine, Page 4, Answer to the
4th question - http://www.naftemporiki.gr/[greek only]), there was an
abstract saying, word by word: "Let me start by saying that, according to a
recert reasearch by IDC, Windows is the least vulnerable operating system,
regarding security issues. The research indicates that there are more than
twice number of viruses for Linux than for Windows". I have searched every
recent research from IDC but I haven't found that information. If there is
indeed such a research, I would like more information about it. If not,
consider writing a response to that allegation, becouse my firm intents to
publicise it.
Thank you in advace.
FirstNameReqd: Giannis
LastNameReqd: Stoilis
Company:
EMailReqd: giannis(a)stoilis.gr
Phone: (+30)6974111687
Publication:
Deadline:
Region: mheath(a)idc.com
formType: Contact Permission to Quote
__________________________________________________
IDC's Annual Technology Industry Briefing:
Directions 2004
Making IT Matter - Finding Opportunities and Defining Value
March 31, San Jose, CA and April 7, Boston, MA
More information at http://www.idc.com/directions04
__________________________________________________
Hi,
yesterday I was at a presentation by Libelis[1] about
their JDO[2] implementation. Since JDO is a specification
which can be implemented by many parties, other
implementations, including as Free Software, exist.
For Libelis these projects are direct competition. This
is also true for projects solving the problem of object
persistence in a way not conforming to the JDO
specification. The most prominent such project at
the moment is Hibernate[3] which is Free Software
under the LGPL.
The speaker from Libelis yesterday had much to say
against Hibernate. Since it's no implementation of
the JDO specification, he called it "proprietary",
meaning not conforming to a "standard". Being a
project with dedicated and visible people he talked
about a "guru problem". All in all he didn't say a good
thing about a Free Software project that is a direct
competition to the product of his company.
Of course there were other Free Software projects
he liked: Ant[4], Tomcat[5], and XDoclet[6] all didn't
have the problems Hibernate had for him. Although
all three being Free Software projects he didn't mention
the problem of them being "proprietary" or the "guru
problem". Since they are no competition for his project
and since he can use them for his own work, they
are welcome.
You may have already noticed that I totally disagree
with the attitude of this person. He clearly was no
part of the Free Software community, only taking and
using the projects he estimated as useful while at the
same time badmouthing projects that are a competition
to him.
I think this is the way business people think about
Free Software: Take as much out of it as possible
without giving anything back. Fight all Free Software
that dangers your business.
This sucks.
Regards
Lutz
[1] http://www.libelis.com/
[2] http://java.sun.com/products/jdo/
[3] http://www.hibernate.org/
[4] http://ant.apache.org/
[5] http://jakarta.apache.org/tomcat/index.html
[6] http://xdoclet.sourceforge.net/
--
Do you want to think like a computer scientist?
Go to http://thinkpython.com/
Read books about Free Software at
http://www.network-theory.co.uk/
GMX ProMail (250 MB Mailbox, 50 FreeSMS, Virenschutz, 2,99 EUR/Monat...)
jetzt 3 Monate GRATIS + 3x DER SPIEGEL +++ http://www.gmx.net/derspiegel +++
I suggest there is a campaign here we need to urgently get off the
ground, asap, right across Europe.
As has been all over the press recently,
http://news.google.com/news?q=mario+monti+microsoft
the EU competition directorate is very keen to settle with
Microsoft before May, so as not to have to co-ordinate with 10 more
accession states which would make everything much more complicated.
Mostly the case is about what to do with Windows being tied with Windows
Media Player; but as the Economist reported, there is also the allegation
> that Microsoft was trying to extend its desktop monopoly into the market for workgroup servers (file, print, mail and web servers) by keeping secret the communications protocols that enable its desktop and server products to talk to each other. “Without such information, alternative server software would be denied a level playing field, as it would be artificially deprived of the opportunity to compete with Microsoft's products ontechnical merits alone,” [as] the commission warned in 2001.
According to the Economist, Microsoft is facing a fine, specific
remedies over Windows Media Player, and also
> Microsoft would be required to license its server-communications protocols to rivals on a “reasonable and non-discriminatory” basis. This isconsistent with the settlement that Microsoft reached in America, which also requires it to license some of its protocols.
This despite the fact that in the States, the licensing program became a
total non-event because of the conditions Microsoft imposed:
> Critics had complained that its previous licensing terms were so complicated that only 11 companies had signed up for them... Following a reviewof the progress of the American settlement, on January 23rd Microsoft agreed to simplify and extend its licensing programme to encourage wider use. After the announcement, Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly, who is overseeing the American settlement, declared herself satisfied with the company's efforts to comply with the settlement.
For more detail, see this IDG story at:
http://www.itworld.com/Man/2699/040120mslicensing/
I suggest that there is a need for an urgent all-Europe campaign that
the protocols should *not* made available RAND, but that the measures
can only have any chance of being an effective remedy if the protocols
are released Public Domain, no strings attached.
Cf, for example, the outcome of the US antitrust remedies, where
developers on WINE to avoid any chance glimpse of the MS documents for
fear that they might be tainted by the license conditions.
Presumably over here the EU measures are intended to prevent MS bullying
SAMBA. The protocol information must be released Free, or it will be
completely useless.
It would also be very useful in the argument over Article 6a
(Interoperability) in the Patents Directive, if we could get the
Competition directorate to understand why Free rather than RAND makes
all the difference.
The Economist even suggests it might be in MS's own long term best interest:
> In other words, Microsoft may some day conclude that the costs of constant regulatory battles—legal costs, fines, bad publicity, and bad relationships with governments—exceed the benefits of its Windows monopoly... One approach would be to hand some of its Windows protocols over to an independent standards body... This seems unimaginable now. But unless governments find the political will and legal arguments needed to break the firm up, it may be the only way its legal battles will ever end.
_______________________________________________
Fsfe-uk mailing list
Fsfe-uk(a)gnu.org
http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/fsfe-uk
_______________________________________________
fsfe-ie(a)fsfeurope.org mailing list
List information: http://mail.fsfeurope.org/pipermail/fsfe-ie
Public archive: https://mail.fsfeurope.org/mailman/listinfo/fsfe-ie
(One can detect an odd terminological distinction between free and open that
appears to be operative within this article, and one line seems to find
Stallman's philosophy exhibited in the no-cost distribution of his
biography, but this is exciting and promising news. The sounds coming back
from his visit to India seem to have been in general very positive, perhaps
reflecting a greater receptivity there to basic key principles regarding the
nature of exclusive rights which the US and other places have largely
ignored, and which the Free Software Foundation has championed, for the last
twenty years. -- Seth)
> http://www.hindu.com/2004/02/01/stories/2004020104231000.htm
NEW DELHI, JAN. 31. The President, A.P.J. Abdul Kalam, last Thursday played
host to two radically divergent poles of the global software industry.
The first to meet the President was Richard Stallman, the leading light of
the free and open source software (FOSS) movement.
Ironically, the people waiting in the Presidential anteroom for the
interaction to end were people from Microsoft.
Dr. Stallman has devoted his life to countering Microsoft's policy of
selling software that cannot be changed because its code is kept a secret.
It also cannot be shared because of licensing restrictions.
Talking to The Hindu, Dr. Stallman said the President was "receptive'' to
his views that development of software should be seen as a political and
social issue and not just from the technological point of view.
At a meeting that lasted 40 minutes, they discussed the need to give people
an alternative way to use computers by popularising open source software
(OSS).
"The President said this was a beautiful concept,'' said Dr. Stallman. Mr.
Kalam had prepared for the meeting by downloading Dr. Stallman's biography
from the Internet which in keeping with the FOSS movement guru's philosophy
is available free of cost.
The two also went over several common interests, including the use of
software in space programming. For the first time, the Mars Rovers vehicle
is using OSS and it is reported to be functioning well.
They also reminisced on the development work on several software programmes
in which both had taken interest.
Besides explaining the political philosophy of FOSS movement, Dr. Stallman
said he also spoke to the President about the real intention behind
Microsoft's plan to spread the use of computers in schools which was "akin
to the colonial system of recruiting the local elite to help keep others in
line.''
"I hope my discussion had some influence on the President and he will be
able to resist being used that way.''
Dr. Stallman gave up a cushy teaching job in a prestigious American
university after he perceived that "computer colonisation'' was spreading
rapidly.
"There were only two options. Either I stopped using computers or I help
everybody to escape. I chose the latter,'' he said.
He explained the concept behind FOSS. The word "free'' did not mean giving
the software gratis.
Rather, it denoted the freedom to control the computer because the seller of
FOSS also provided the source code or the manner in which a particular
software was constructed.
"This way you can see how it works, you can change it and also share the
software.''
By taking to FOSS, India would be able to cut down on the outflow of foreign
exchange which was going to become very large in the near future.
So far, Microsoft licences were not being forced on individuals, but in the
coming days, proprietary software companies would make it impossible for
individuals to make copies clandestinely.
"The flood (outflow of foreign exchange) will then become a torrent,'' he
said. Free software, in contrast, would encourage local information
technology developers to innovate and adapt the software constantly. The
result will be that money will circulate in the local economy, he said.
--
DRM is Theft! We are the Stakeholders!
New Yorkers for Fair Use
http://www.nyfairuse.org
[CC] Counter-copyright: http://realmeasures.dyndns.org/cc
I reserve no rights restricting copying, modification or distribution of
this incidentally recorded communication. Original authorship should be
attributed reasonably, but only so far as such an expectation might hold for
usual practice in ordinary social discourse to which one holds no claim of
exclusive rights.