|
Authored by: kuroshima on Sunday, June 03 2012 @ 04:50 AM EDT |
Now that we all recovered from the excesses we had when
we heard that sanity
and justice had prevailed, and that
APIs were not copyrightable, I have some
questions for you
legal minds
- We have not seen the damage numbers
for the 9 test
files and the rangeCheck method. IIRC, they're for the judge
to
determine, right? when will we see them
- When does the clock start ticking
for appeals? when does
it finish ticking (meaning that if it finishes ticking
at
time t, we can expect BSF to file it at t-1 minute)
- Can Google appeal to
the judge's overruling the jury on
the test files?
- The question of
willfulness on the copying of the
rangecheck and 9 test files also up to the
judge, right?
- We saw at the SCO trial that the winner should also
appeal
everything that didn't go their way. Does this mean
that we should start seeing
appeals by Google, on all the
parts where the judge seemed to bend backwards to
help
Oracle?
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
- Off Topic - Authored by: darrellb on Sunday, June 03 2012 @ 07:17 AM EDT
- Off Topic - Authored by: PJ on Sunday, June 03 2012 @ 10:51 AM EDT
- Off Topic - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, June 04 2012 @ 07:23 AM EDT
- Off Topic - Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, June 03 2012 @ 11:02 AM EDT
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, June 03 2012 @ 08:16 AM EDT |
We've always respected the BBC for its impartiality and accuracy of reporting,
which is above question. So here's another gem from the beloved
Beeb. [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: SirHumphrey on Sunday, June 03 2012 @ 08:19 AM EDT |
Don't sue Youtube
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nIwrgAnx6Q8&feature=share[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: SirHumphrey on Sunday, June 03 2012 @ 08:28 AM EDT |
http://weruletheinternet.com/2012/03/28/a-gallery-of-cute-baby-animals-to-put-a-
smile-on-your-face/[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, June 03 2012 @ 10:53 AM EDT |
Facebook is built on open source from top to bottom, and could not
exist without it. As engineers here, we use, contribute to, and release a lot of
open source software, including pieces of our core infrastructure such as HipHop
and Thrift.
But in our C++ services code, one clear bottleneck to
releasing more work has been that any open sourced project needed to break
dependencies on unreleased internal library code. To help solve that problem,
today we open sourced an initial release of Folly, a collection of reusable C++
library artifacts developed and used at Facebook.
Jordan DeLong, Facebook
---
https://github.com/facebook/folly/blob/master/folly/docs/FBVector.md
https://github.com/facebook/folly/blob/master/folly/docs/Dynamic.md
https://github.com/facebook/folly/blob/master/folly/docs/Format.md [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, June 03 2012 @ 03:55 PM EDT |
Basically, what are my options for avoiding UEFI on new machines?
Will my non-UEFI machine suddenly become a hot black-market item?
Will anyone make non-UEFI machines? Will governments ban the manufacture of
non-UEFI machines?
Can I wipe Windows off my hard drive and go with just, say, Linux or FreeBSD?
Will Zareason, System 76, and other Linux computer sellers also be subject to
this new Microsoft tax? (You know Verisign will send some of that $99 under the
table to Microsoft -- perhaps half?)
Will Red Hat's business interests become antithetical to free software, kinda
like Open Suse and other sellouts? Does Red Hat pay any license fees to
Microsoft? Didn't Stallman already warn us about corporate interests?
The likelihood anyone will challenge this on anti-trust grounds is roughly the
same as anyone arguing in court that software patents per se should be
invalidated. I'm not waiting up nights.
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, June 04 2012 @ 04:07 AM EDT |
I hope you appreciate ;) [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|