Re: SCO Ip right's claim on linux and SCO Intellectual Property License Program

2004-11-01 Thread Steve Langasek
Shawn, On Fri, Oct 29, 2004 at 07:18:10PM -0500, Shawn Robinson wrote: My little brother was approached by SCO yesterday regarding licensing his linux servers so as to avoid being possibly sued by SCO for copyright infringment. I am wondering as to what the Linux comunity thinks regarding

Re: SCO Ip right's claim on linux and SCO Intellectual Property License Program

2004-11-01 Thread Michael D. Crawford
I'm no lawyer either, but I like to write. Please enjoy: Let's Put SCO Behind Bars http://www.goingware.com/notes/prosecute-sco.html Michael D. Crawford GoingWare Inc. - Expert Software Development and Consulting http://www.goingware.com/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tilting at Windmills for a Better

Re: SCO Ip right's claim on linux and SCO Intellectual Property License Program

2004-11-01 Thread Anthony W. Youngman
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Steve Langasek [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes That said, for my money, SCO's tactics smell of racketeering; but it's up to judges to make the final decision about whether they're actually illegal. Read up on www.groklaw.net for why SCOG don't have any claim (note the

Re: SCO Ip right's claim on linux and SCO Intellectual Property License Program

2004-11-01 Thread Brian Thomas Sniffen
This is not appropriate for this list. Please stop posting it here. I don't mean to offend you, but there seems to be an astroturfing campaign to make it look like various Free Software mailing lists have been flaming about SCO; I can't imagine why they or anyone else would want such a thing,

Re: mass bug filing for unmet dependencies

2004-11-01 Thread Marco d'Itri
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You're asking why I think can be flashed, but works just fine without being flashed is different from won't work without being loaded? Fundamentally, the latter case forces us to not ignore it. The equipment won't work if we ignore the issue. On Mon, Nov 01, 2004

Re: firmware status for eagle-usb-*

2004-11-01 Thread Marco d'Itri
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yes, sure! If some stream of bits is considered software when stored in RAM then I can't see why it should not be software anymore when stored in some other media. I have not seen any convincing argument about why software should lose its nature if stored in ROM. If

Re: mass bug filing for unmet dependencies

2004-11-01 Thread Raul Miller
You're asking why I think can be flashed, but works just fine without being flashed is different from won't work without being loaded? Fundamentally, the latter case forces us to not ignore it. The equipment won't work if we ignore the issue. On Mon, Nov 01, 2004 at 01:51:56AM +0100,

Re: mass bug filing for unmet dependencies

2004-11-01 Thread Raul Miller
You're asking why I think can be flashed, but works just fine without being flashed is different from won't work without being loaded? Fundamentally, the latter case forces us to not ignore it. The equipment won't work if we ignore the issue. On Mon, Nov 01, 2004 at 01:51:56AM +0100, Marco