On 4/10/2014 10:02 AM, Phil Stracchino wrote: > On 04/10/14 09:45, jon pounder wrote: >> On 04/10/2014 09:39 AM, Jason A. Kates wrote: >>> As they are worded more like slander than indisputable facts. They >>> could be worded in a neutral manner, as they are listed it's far from >>> neutral or strait facts. >>> >>> Equating this to a holocaust denier is also very very wrong. >> Given they are being sued for doing what they feel is right, how neutral >> do you expect them to be ? > Are you suggesting anyone can reasonably feel that it is "right" to > copy, while under a signed non-disclosure agreement, the work of other > people and remove all of the author attributions? In the academic and > publishing world, that is called plagiarism. In business, it is called > intellectual-property theft.
I didn't get that impression. I believe all he is suggesting is that if anything needs to be removed for being illegal, then it is up to a court, not Wikipedia, to decide what is illegal. That said, I think most everyone agrees with you. As I see it, they are, like Milli Vanilli, not on the inside what they appear to be on the outside. Now that this is becoming clear to the community, they will receive just about as much respect as Milli Vanilli. What they are doing is more or less putting their own head in the noose, at least for the community. I have never been able to decipher the logic used by courts so won't guess at the legal issues. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Put Bad Developers to Shame Dominate Development with Jenkins Continuous Integration Continuously Automate Build, Test & Deployment Start a new project now. Try Jenkins in the cloud. http://p.sf.net/sfu/13600_Cloudbees _______________________________________________ Bacula-devel mailing list Bacula-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-devel
