|
|
|
| Authored by: SilverWave on Friday, May 04 2012 @ 02:07 PM EDT |
| Apple and Samsung scoop up 99 percent of handset
profits ---
RMS: The 4 Freedoms
0 run the program for any purpose
1 study the source code and change it
2 make copies and distribute them
3 publish modified versions
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, May 04 2012 @ 03:12 PM EDT |
Here's the rub: Some publishers may feel good that their books are
not all over P2P networks, available in torrents, or DRM-free editions. But
really, think about this.
If nobody wants your content bad enough to get it
and make it available, should you have published it? Obscurity is more of an
enemy than piracy. Here is the double rub: If your content is free and on P2P
networks, torrents, etc. and people are not downloading it, is it any good?
Seriously. Most of these sites show the number of downloads on the page so
others can see if lots of people like your content.
I think it would be
embarrassing if nobody wanted my works for free. As a publisher, it'd be
something to make us re-evaluate our publishing plans, quickly.
Mike
Hendrickson, Vice President for Content Strategy, O'Reilly[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
- Exactly - n/t - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, May 04 2012 @ 06:37 PM EDT
| |
| Authored by: Gringo_ on Friday, May 04 2012 @ 03:40 PM EDT |
An
Article by Thomas Claburn
InformationWeek...
Ochoa
also believes that the judge made a
mistake in his jury
instructions--specifically, item 30--by
stating that Google had to obtain
written permission from
Sun or Oracle to use the copyrighted Java
APIs.
"That's simply not true," he stated, noting that written
permission is required only for an exclusive license and
that a non-exclusive
license can be conveyed verbally.
Google has argued that Sun CEO Jonathan
Schwartz's
endorsement of Android amounted to just such a
license.
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
