Re: Linux and Multimedia-->The Potential is there<<-- But...........
From: The Ghost In The Machine (ewill_at_sirius.athghost7038suus.net)
Date: 12/31/04
- Next message: mha_at_math.mit.edu: "Re: Booting to a command line?"
- Previous message: General Protection Fault: "Re: Linux? Why bother?"
- In reply to: rapskat: "Re: Linux and Multimedia-->The Potential is there<<-- But..........."
- Next in thread: The Ghost In The Machine: "Re: Linux and Multimedia-->The Potential is there<<-- But..........."
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 17:00:13 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, rapskat
<rapskat@yahoo.com>
wrote
on Thu, 30 Dec 2004 19:11:48 -0500
<pan.2004.12.31.00.11.44.215546@rapskat.com>:
> Error log for Thu, 30 Dec 2004 15:20:44 +0000: Conor caused a Page Fault
> at address <MPG.1c3e2d26cf67f60b989a87@news.giganews.com>, details...
>
>> In article rapskat says...
>>> Error log for Wed, 29 Dec 2004 04:48:25 +0000: Conor caused a Page
>>> Fault at address <MPG.1c3c47733daa7bd2989a6d@news.giganews.com>,
>>> details...
>>>
>>> > In article rapskat says...
>>> >> Error log for Wed, 29 Dec 2004 03:02:11 +0000: Conor caused a Page
>>> >> Fault at address <MPG.1c3c2e91e3e3a75e989a4f@news.giganews.com>,
>>> >> details...
>>> >>
>>> >> > In article flatfish+++ says...
>>> >> >
>>> >> >> Yea sure.
>>> >> >> Maybe they can get around to writing a decent help system.
>>> >> >> Programs that actually work?
>>> >> >> Some decent plug-ins?
>>> >> >>
>>> >> > They have some decent plugins. Sadly they come in the w32codecs
>>> >> > package which has more than a little irony attached as well as a
>>> >> > huge dose of illegality.
>>> >>
>>> >> You know all about that, don't you? Since you run pirated software.
>>> >>
>>> > Proof?
>>>
>>> Prove you don't.
>>>
>> I don't need to. Under UK law its the accuser who has to provide proof.
>
> Sounds like you are pretty familiar with that. Been accused of alot of
> things much?
>
> All of my software is 100% legal and legit, can you say the same? Are you
> willing to submit your systems to an audit right now?
>
Software patents are going to make things *real* interesting
in this space, unfortunately.
Here's what little I know about the situation.
Trade Secret: I'm not going to tell you.
Copyright: I'm going to tell you, but if you use it, all credit
will have to go back to me for the original idea,
and I can accuse you of stealing that idea.
Truly independent development, however, is fine.
Patent: I'm going to tell everyone, but, if you use it, or
derive from it, or even independently generate
the idea yourself, assuming that said independent
generation wasn't prior to my discovery/development
of this idea, I can accuse you of patent infringement.
Or something like that. :-) There's also different lifetimes.
Copyright is death + 70 years, if I'm not mistaken. Patents
last all of 17, if that (a bit long for an industry which
gets itself replaced every 3 years or so at the hardware
level!). Trade secrets might last forever.
I should note that there are currently about 6 million patents.
I don't know how many are active -- probably a few tens of
thousands -- or how many are even relevant. Some of them
are quite interesting, such as the (fortunately now-expired)
claim on how to draw an XOR'ed cursor on a raster.
SCO, AIUI, is making claims using copyright law. Wild-assed, silly,
and ultimately false claims. However, suppose Linux is using
something to which Microsoft owns a patent? Prior art might
save Linux (if one can find it in this new electronic world, where
one can change 2005 to 1995 with but a few keystrokes), but if
there's no prior art, someone's going to be very unhappy, and
it probably won't be Microsoft. :-/
And Linux is at a disadvantage, for Microsoft can readily
call up its source code, pore over it with a fine-toothed
comb (and a squad of legal eagles), and then throw a suit
on a judge's desk next Tuesday, with lots of details on
alleged patent violations. (The judge, of course, would
have to ultimately decide the truth of the allegations,
after a long, protracted discovery process, trial, etc.)
Linus, were he willing (you'd have to ask him! :-) ),
or any other FOSS advocate, would first have to find some
Microsoft source code to analyze. There might be a Russian
or two willing to show him something that purports to be
Microsoft source code but there's no way to know, short of
going to Redmond and asking the receptionist some pointed
questions and ultimately negotiating with ... somebody.
I have no idea who. Meanwhile, furious scribbling will
be going on somewhere in a back room to eradicate the
violation.
Whoops. No violation found in the source code, waste of time
on the FOSS advocate's part.
I suppose one could try to go through old backup CD's, tapes,
or what not, but this is beginning to smell like a fishing
expedition instead of anything useful, though the most
current version of source code ideally would be available
for persual, especially for technical support looking for
potential bugs to formulate a response to the frustrated
customers calling in.
The flip side of this, of course, is the "million eye"
theory, which might actually work, though it's hard to tell
since an awful lot of people are unwilling to take credit
-- either because they're naturally modest ("aw shucks,
t'warn't nothing; anybody who knows a lambda closure from
a semaphore derivative could've done it") or because they
don't want to face the repercussions from nasty types
should the bug fix itself contain a bug. FOSS, therefore, probably
contains a number of contributions that are (a) obvious, and (b)
may never be properly credited to the individuals doing them.
No way for me to know -- but with Linux, the tear.c bug of
yesterdecade was patched within hours of its emergence.
Microsoft took about six weeks.
Welcome to 2005: the Year of the Weird. ;-)
-- #191, ewill3@earthlink.net It's still legal to go .sigless.
- Next message: mha_at_math.mit.edu: "Re: Booting to a command line?"
- Previous message: General Protection Fault: "Re: Linux? Why bother?"
- In reply to: rapskat: "Re: Linux and Multimedia-->The Potential is there<<-- But..........."
- Next in thread: The Ghost In The Machine: "Re: Linux and Multimedia-->The Potential is there<<-- But..........."
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
