On CBS MoneyWatch: Report: Tiger to Pay Wife $60 Million
BNET Business Network:
BNET
TechRepublic
ZDNet
TalkBack 68 of 68:
« Previous
its just the law
like it or not,

all Novell are saying is " we are not going to make it a default condition that our INSTALL contains code that is proprietry".

in other words, we wont make you break the law by installing our software.
but what you do with your computer, APART from what we've given you, YOU CAN DO WHAT YOU LIKE.

if you feel you need to break the law, YOU can get proprietry code and install it.

its about legal obligations, and INTENT.

IF they give you illegal code, its with the INTENT that you'll use it, putting the RESPONSIBILITY of its USE ON Novell.

IF Novell DO NOT provide that code, requiring the USER to install it, its THE USER who then has the INTENT to use that software, (legal or not), but the RESPONSIBILITY IS NOW ON YOU,, THE USER.

You can buy a car that is able to be registerd, and is legal, then you can buy a supercharger for it, put Nitros Oxide on it, drop in a 357 small block chev.

it will NOT be a "street legal" car anymore, but it WAS YOU the USER with the "INTENT" to break the law, by modifying what you have received IN A LEGAL FORM.

its all about liability and responsibility.

Open Source software, is the same as a "UNERVIRSAL KEY" and key that will OPEN ANY LOCK.

just because you have the ability to "OPEN ANY LOCK" does not give you the right to go anywhere you like, and it DOES NOT MEAN, the contents of EVERYTHING protected BY A LOCK IS YOURS.

this is what OPEN SOURCE Seem to believe. locked or not, everything is "fair game".

i dont believe that is true, but i do believe its very restrictive for OPEN Source FOS in general.
(as shown by its lack of success)
Posted by: Aussie_Troll   Posted on: 12/14/06 You are currently: a Guest | Members login | Terms of Use

Alert moderator to an offensive message

Subscribe to this discussion via Email or RSS

Novell bans proprietary Linux modules  Loverock Davidson | 08/01/06
Don't be any dumber than necessary, Rock.  Henry Miller | 08/01/06
I haven't thus far  Loverock Davidson | 08/01/06
You did thus now...  yyuko@... | 08/01/06
And so it begins  Loverock Davidson | 08/01/06
And your point is?  nucrash | 08/01/06
That's hypocritical and chicken s@#$  JamesSingleton | 08/01/06
Stupid.  baggins_z | 08/01/06
And everyone says, "Huh"?  No_Ax_to_Grind | 08/01/06
It works just fine  Tim Patterson | 08/01/06
A better choice  JamesSingleton | 08/01/06
Good thing they're not the only vendor!  Henaway | 08/01/06
And look where it's getting them...  Tim Patterson | 08/01/06
For the desktop maybe...  No_Ax_to_Grind | 08/01/06
Signed their death warrant?  Michael Kelly | 08/01/06
I call Bull.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 08/01/06
not the point  NemesisNL | 08/01/06
Gee, seems like they are  No_Ax_to_Grind | 08/01/06
Older ones are  Michael Kelly | 08/01/06
Do you need 3D and modem drivers in server software?  clockmendergb@... | 08/11/06
Open source is the better tool  bdg_z | 08/01/06
Whoa up...  No_Ax_to_Grind | 08/01/06
Mirrors  Yagotta B. Kidding | 08/01/06
What does IP have to do with this?  No_Ax_to_Grind | 08/01/06
Everything  Edward Meyers | 08/01/06
Tell me WHOS copyrights are violated?  No_Ax_to_Grind | 08/01/06
Whose ax is gored  Yagotta B. Kidding | 08/01/06
Whoa up...  No_Ax_to_Grind | 08/01/06
No_Ax Says...  NetArch. | 08/01/06
Novell was "done" anyway.  Anton Philidor | 08/01/06
Who says they couldn't have been profitable separately?  Michael Kelly | 08/01/06
SuSE says.  Anton Philidor | 08/02/06
RE: Novell was "done" anyway.  richdave | 08/10/06
It's like I said, community and proprietary software don't mix  stevey_d | 08/02/06
The arrogance of the Linux Community is amazing  ITTech001 | 08/01/06
Not quite  chill633 | 08/01/06
There are few things in the world...  Henry Miller | 08/01/06
The arrogance of hardware vendors  cabdriverjim | 08/01/06
That is kind of supporting what I'm getting at  ITTech001 | 08/01/06
What you state is the primary problem in the industry  kokuryu | 08/01/06
Gee, my ten year old drivers still work.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 08/01/06
Gee-Whiz... Educate me  ITTech001 | 08/01/06
Compile? No that's for geeks with nothing better to do  No_Ax_to_Grind | 08/01/06
No, he's not dead wrong  NetArch. | 08/01/06
Better things to do?  pyellman | 08/10/06
The arrogance of the Poster is amazing....  eliyahu | 08/01/06
So what is your point?  ITTech001 | 08/01/06
SuSE 10.1?  laredoflash@... | 08/01/06
Novell are Boneheads  JamesSingleton | 08/01/06
not bone heads, but even so...  shryko | 08/01/06
On advice of counsel  Yagotta B. Kidding | 08/01/06
So your suggesting that Linux can't use proprietary.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 08/01/06
You know you're just trash talking!  Spikey_Mike | 08/01/06
Well it would seem Novell disagrees  No_Ax_to_Grind | 08/01/06
nope  NemesisNL | 08/01/06
Ah, I see, and how many users  No_Ax_to_Grind | 08/01/06
It's clear that Linux will never challenge windows  stevey_d | 08/02/06
That is what they said already  kokuryu | 08/01/06
A wise move ...  George Mitchell | 08/01/06
What 'bout Big Blue?  seosamh_z | 08/01/06
Mixing is kosher  NetArch. | 08/01/06
Very insightful ...  George Mitchell | 08/02/06
A different animal ...  George Mitchell | 08/02/06
United we stand with Stallman  Boot_Agnostic | 08/01/06
Here's a thought.....  Shelendrea | 08/01/06
Novelle is a consulting firm, Novell is the company we are talking about...  Physco Dude | 08/02/06
Novell is simply a business making businbess decisions...  Physco Dude | 08/02/06
its just the law  Aussie_Troll | 12/14/06

What do you think?

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

advertisement
advertisement
Click Here

SmartPlanet

Click Here