| Author |
Message |
CaesarTjalbo
|
|
Post subject: RE: Re: RE: Windows 8 locking out GNU/Linux ?
 Posted: 22.10.2011, 22:45
|
|
Joined: 2010-09-13
Posts: 95
Location: Enschede
Status: Offline
|
|
Just to be clear: I don't like the way things are progressing around 'Secure Boot'. Having access to the certificates in UEFI and the parameters with which the system works are essential imho to be owner and to keep your system valuable (to yourself and a possible next user).
Neither am I happy with what's happening on the front of 'intellectual property'. The 'phone wars' are a disgrace and most software patents shouldn't have been awarded. Copyright terms are way, way, way too long.
It's not so easy though. There's a case for software patents because innovation happens through software, just as innovation might happen through genetic research. Does that mean that someone might be able to 'own' the JPEG compression method, agricultural seeds or the breast cancer gen? I don't know, I really don't. It's not a black/white issue for me, I do see that some form of 'intellectual property' deserves a place under the sun. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
dibl
|
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: 22.10.2011, 23:07
|
|
Joined: 2010-09-12
Posts: 302
Location: Dayton, Ohio, USA
Status: Offline
|
|
I consider software code to be "a work of authorship", like a novel or a screenplay or a poem. If it is published, then a copyright is the correct intellectual property protection. If it is held proprietary, then it can be a trade secret, as long as the secret is kept (but then there is no copyright). I don't consider that software code can be an "invention" under patent law.
Just my two cents' worth. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
slam
|
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: 23.10.2011, 10:35
|
|
Team Member
Joined: 1970-01-01
Posts: 606
Location: w3
Status: Offline
|
|
I fully agree with dibl here. And let me add, the same point of view is valid for manufacturing methods, chemical formulars, genetical modified seeds, and many other "inventions" which actually are "just" discoveries. If you feel you want to protect them, keep them secret. Otherwise, publish your discoveries for the better of everyone.
The enitre system of patents has been abused and entirely lost it's meaning since long time, and should go. Several countries around the world already deny the legality of software patents, others do so when it comes to genetical modified seeds.
On the other hand, the copyright for works of art is accepted world-wide and necessary. However, the recent related legal practice is inacceptable, and in many cases illegal.
Greetings,
Chris |
_________________
an operating system must operate
development is life
my Debian repo
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
dpt
|
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: 23.10.2011, 15:44
|
|
Joined: 2010-09-11
Posts: 281
Location: New Delhi
Status: Offline
|
|
Everything we use daily has been invented by someone in the past.
Fortunately there were no patent laws.
So we are where we are.
Everyone have a nice day.
dpt |
_________________
In a lunatic asylum, everyone thinks that he is the doctor.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
titan
|
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: 23.10.2011, 16:40
|
|
Joined: 2010-09-11
Posts: 66
Status: Offline
|
|
|
dpt wrote:
Everything we use daily has been invented by someone in the past.
Fortunately there were no patent laws.
The massive increase in "inventions" including process started around the time of the industrial revolution. A patent system existed in the UK before then from the the early 1600's and earlier elsewhere in the world. So most of what we use in todays world has been the subject of a patent |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Luis_P
|
|
|
Post subject: Canonical and Red Hat have something to say
Posted: 06.11.2011, 12:41
|
|
Joined: 2010-09-11
Posts: 142
Location: Barcelona, Spain
Status: Offline
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
DeepDayze
|
|
|
Post subject: RE: Canonical and Red Hat have something to say
Posted: 06.11.2011, 15:33
|
|
Joined: 2010-09-11
Posts: 611
Location: USA
Status: Offline
|
|
| I would suggest going with the independent pc/laptop builders such as System76 and ZaReason in the future as the big OEM's most likely will go with implementing Secure Boot as recommended by Microsoft. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
dibl
|
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: 06.11.2011, 16:21
|
|
Joined: 2010-09-12
Posts: 302
Location: Dayton, Ohio, USA
Status: Offline
|
|
| There is a large market of "enthusiasts" who build their own computers from purchased components, and they mostly install the latest Windows OS. It is not only gamers, it is engineers and value-added resellers. It seems Microsoft should be careful -- if they push too far on secure boot (locking out hardware changes, etc.), they will destroy a piece of their own market. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
DeepDayze
|
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: 06.11.2011, 17:38
|
|
Joined: 2010-09-11
Posts: 611
Location: USA
Status: Offline
|
|
|
dibl wrote:
There is a large market of "enthusiasts" who build their own computers from purchased components, and they mostly install the latest Windows OS. It is not only gamers, it is engineers and value-added resellers. It seems Microsoft should be careful -- if they push too far on secure boot (locking out hardware changes, etc.), they will destroy a piece of their own market.
True, but I am sure they'll take that risk to protect their monopoly and protect their products from piracy (yeah right) |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
detaos
|
|
|
Post subject: RE: Re: RE: Windows 8 locking out GNU/Linux ?
Posted: 17.11.2011, 18:12
|
|
Team Member
Joined: 2010-08-26
Posts: 165
Location: floating in the ether
Status: Offline
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CaesarTjalbo
|
|
|
Post subject: Re: RE: Re: RE: Windows 8 locking out GNU/Linux ?
Posted: 18.11.2011, 00:02
|
|
Joined: 2010-09-13
Posts: 95
Location: Enschede
Status: Offline
|
|
|
detaos wrote:
Nothing Microsoft can build can't be broken!
Just spent 1 1/2 days with 3 guys trying to deploy an MS database on an MS operating system using MS tools and I have a feeling it's hard to break some of their stuff further. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
DeepDayze
|
|
|
Post subject: Re: RE: Re: RE: Windows 8 locking out GNU/Linux ?
Posted: 18.11.2011, 02:03
|
|
Joined: 2010-09-11
Posts: 611
Location: USA
Status: Offline
|
|
|
CaesarTjalbo wrote:
detaos wrote:
Nothing Microsoft can build can't be broken!
Just spent 1 1/2 days with 3 guys trying to deploy an MS database on an MS operating system using MS tools and I have a feeling it's hard to break some of their stuff further.
Would taken you just a hew hours to implement a similar database on Linux using OSS tools :^) |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
piper
|
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: 18.11.2011, 10:41
|
|
Moderator
Joined: 2010-09-11
Posts: 467
Location: cheektowaga, ny
Status: Offline
|
|
|
dibl wrote:
There is a large market of "enthusiasts" who build their own computers from purchased components
That would be me 
My last purchased computer was a state of the art super fast 166MHz cpu with the biggest harddrive at the time of 2.1 gigs. This box was made from Packard Bell (ouch) |
_________________
debian sid | apt-get into it
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
kb0hae
|
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: 18.11.2011, 15:37
|
|
Joined: 2010-09-12
Posts: 50
Status: Offline
|
|
| Everything that Microsoft has ever built has been built broken! But sometimes its not hard to break their products further... |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
alexk
|
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: 18.11.2011, 17:43
|
|
Joined: 2010-10-01
Posts: 145
Location: Bay state
Status: Offline
|
|
|
piper wrote:
dibl wrote:
There is a large market of "enthusiasts" who build their own computers from purchased components
That would be me
And me. Just built my second box. Last purchased computer was a 1997 Cybermax PII-266 with Win95 (quite a 'orrible box). I think quite a lot of "roll-your-own" builders like to put other OSes on their boxes, even if it's primarily a Windows box. I don't tend to think this group would take kindly to having this freedom taken away. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
