Can any computer geek types help

**dhunt** · 5th October 2004, 09:22

Originally Posted by jrandom

Probably not.

These are the days of children being sent home because they don't turn up with their own laptop, you know.

Personnally I think schools should support free software more as it is cheaper for the school and mean the parents have have it at home without as in F/F in case forking out for 4 back tyres.

**jrandom** · 5th October 2004, 09:24

Originally Posted by dhunt

Personnally I think schools should support free software more as it is cheaper for the school and mean the parents have have it at home without as in F/F in case forking out for 4 back tyres.

Yes, but that policy would imply intelligence, research and open-mindedness on the part of our educational planners.

I'm sure they much prefer the regular free lunches and Christmas hampers from their local Microsoft sales rep.

**dhunt** · 5th October 2004, 10:20

Originally Posted by jrandom

Yes, but that policy would imply intelligence, research and open-mindedness on the part of our educational planners.

I'm sure they much prefer the regular free lunches and Christmas hampers from their local Microsoft sales rep.

Yeah unfortuneatley that's life.

Now if I were incharge ....

**Yokai** · 5th October 2004, 10:59

Originally Posted by jrandom

Originally Posted by dhunt

Personnally I think schools should support free software more as it is cheaper for the school and mean the parents have have it at home without as in F/F in case forking out for 4 back tyres.

Yes, but that policy would imply intelligence, research and open-mindedness on the part of our educational planners.

I'm sure they much prefer the regular free lunches and Christmas hampers from their local Microsoft sales rep.

Yeah - but to be slightly fair to Adobe, part of the problem is the licensing of gif technology. .GIF is a licensed product - so to be able to actually produce .GIF means that you need to pay someone something (I wanna say UNISYS, but I can't remember OTTOMH)

On the other hand, If she *needs* photoshop, then there are evaluation versions available for download at Adobe's site. I use Paint Shop Pro, and The Gimp and Photoshop.

I strongly disagree with piracy of software because it drives the price up for all users. Open Source is the way forward, but we all know how difficult it is for people to manage that on a day to day basis. Someone friendly is bound to have a copy somewhere...

Yokai

**jrandom** · 5th October 2004, 11:11

Originally Posted by Yokai

Yeah - but to be slightly fair to Adobe, part of the problem is the licensing of gif technology. .GIF is a licensed product - so to be able to actually produce .GIF means that you need to pay someone something (I wanna say UNISYS, but I can't remember OTTOMH)

'Burn all GIFs', indeed.

The UNISYS and IBM GIF patents have now expired, though, so it's open slather.

Originally Posted by Yokai

I strongly disagree with piracy of software because it drives the price up for all users. Open Source is the way forward, but we all know how difficult it is for people to manage that on a day to day basis. Someone friendly is bound to have a copy somewhere...

Indeed. However, I do think that there is a difference between the commercial exploitation of pirated software, and the 'mom and pop' variety. Not to excuse the immorality of it, but the criminality of software piracy has been painted in an overly simplified light by those with a vested financial interest.

In fact, I was rather annoyed at an advertisement equating movie piracy with stealing cars and handbags that I had to sit through (after paying $14.50 for a ticket!) before the movie the last time I went to the cinema.

Information wants to be free. Why shouldn't we unlock its door?

**Drunken Monkey** · 5th October 2004, 11:20

Originally Posted by Yokai

I strongly disagree with piracy of software because it drives the price up for all users. Open Source is the way forward, but we all know how difficult it is for people to manage that on a day to day basis. Someone friendly is bound to have a copy somewhere...
Yokai

Granted the hyposcrisy of the software industry isn't as bad as the music industry, but if you've ever worked for a software house or two, licensing is money for nothing. Hell, Microsoft's products are pirated left right and centre, and they still managed to become the most valuable software house in the world. For $350, I'd probably just buy MS Office, but not for $1400.

In this case whole classrooms of people are being forced to purchase a product which they may only use for 1 semester. Software has little- or no- resale value (unless you be a fool), as it usually takes less than 18 months for a product to become superceeded, and less than 30 months for the software to not be supported at all.

Yes, educational institutes _should_ be obligated to push open source, but JRandom isn't kidding about those free lunches and Christmas hampers. Too many kick-backs thrown in by the commercial sector for schools to turn the contracts down (used to be involved in Educational support and resale as well a few years ago)

Bah, I'm just jealous now as my cert has expired and I sub for a company that no longer has MS partner/reseller status - I don't get free lunches and Xmas hampers courtesy of MS anymore either

**dhunt** · 5th October 2004, 11:28

Originally Posted by Yokai

I strongly disagree with piracy of software because it drives the price up for all users. Yokai

I actually sort of disagree with you on this as many students use pirated software and become familar/used to use particular software such that when they get out into the market place that is what they want to use, which actually helps the software companies to some degree, but the flip side is if everyone did it, the software companies would be the ones to loose out.

**dhunt** · 5th October 2004, 11:37

Originally Posted by Drunken Monkey

Yes, educational institutes _should_ be obligated to push open source, but JRandom isn't kidding about those free lunches and Christmas hampers. Too many kick-backs thrown in by the commercial sector for schools to turn the contracts down (used to be involved in Educational support and resale as well a few years ago

This is getting better than it was. There are governments (not nz) that are pushing opensource for use in the government and schools etc and some have decided to replace x thousand computers running linux and opensource software.

I know in some case where schools etc have decided to go with linux and then at the last minute micro$oft has given them really cheap prices on software and is some cases they have decided to take them up on the offer but what happens next time round etc ...

**Yokai** · 5th October 2004, 11:46

Originally Posted by jrandom

Indeed. However, I do think that there is a difference between the commercial exploitation of pirated software, and the 'mom and pop' variety. Not to excuse the immorality of it, but the criminality of software piracy has been painted in an overly simplified light by those with a vested financial interest.

Agreed. There is a difference between commercial exploitation and the mom and pop variety. The Mom and Pop variety is what drives prices up. The penalties for Commercial piracy are seriously high, and cost hundreds of thousands to defend against, and cost the originators of the IP a certain amount. The Mom&Pop variety costs MILLIONS of dollars per year that is unreclaimable except for passing it on to the regular customer.
What needs to happen is some way of evaluating software or providing free/cheap software tools to all (Oh look - there goes the GIMP!)

Originally Posted by jrandom

In fact, I was rather annoyed at an advertisement equating movie piracy with stealing cars and handbags that I had to sit through (after paying $14.50 for a ticket!) before the movie the last time I went to the cinema.

I disagree with that. Movie Piracy for downloading movies puts a large amount of money in the hands of various unsavoury characters. It is a surprisingly large leakage. BUT....

Outside of all this, it is really a defense of copyright issue. Copyright actually drives innovation and creativity. Copyright basically protects the author's expressionof an idea , so that they know that the sweat of their brow isn't going to be exploited for nefarious porpoises, or dark and shady dolphins either. What that does is mean that someone can say "Hey - I'll make a *thing* and I can then give/sell or do whatever I want to with it, and I can license it for reproduction or modification (e.g. the GPL) for either no cost or some cost, and Herr Hitler over there can't steal it. IP (as a geek I know this from first hand experience) IS Property. Yes, it IS the same as stealing my Bike. I'm quite happy for KBers to ride my bike if they ask, but I don't just anyone riding around on it while I don't have control over it...

Originally Posted by jrandom

Information wants to be free. Why shouldn't we unlock its door?

I'm a Geek. Information wants to be free - but control of that information should be in the hands of the person that created it... (note - this does not mean some faceless nameless corporation, but the actual dude/dudette what made it)... You have no right to unlock the door to my house, why should you have the right to unlock the door to my information?

Somewhat

but then again, I'm bored at work, and my GF is an IP Lawyer!

Yo

**Yokai** · 5th October 2004, 11:52

Originally Posted by dhunt

I actually sort of disagree with you on this as many students use pirated software and become familar/used to use particular software such that when they get out into the market place that is what they want to use,

And this is why people like Alias (who make Maya) release Personal Learning Edition software. Creates all the stuff that MAYA does, but with a Big "EDUCATIONAL ONLY" embedded into the images etc. Problem is that people don't like it... they want to be able to take it with them when they move on from being a student or whatever...

Yo

**jrandom** · 5th October 2004, 11:55

Originally Posted by Yokai

I disagree with that. Movie Piracy for downloading movies puts a large amount of money in the hands of various unsavoury characters. It is a surprisingly large leakage. BUT....

Hmmm. The same lines were trotted out when VCRs started turning into a commodity. I'm unconvinced of the real commercial impact.

Originally Posted by Yokai

Yes, it IS the same as stealing my Bike.

Demonstrably untrue. If I steal your bike, you no longer have a bike.

Originally Posted by Yokai

I'm a Geek. Information wants to be free - but control of that information should be in the hands of the person that created it...I'm bored at work, and my GF is an IP Lawyer!

Funnily enough, the job that I'm slacking off from to post on KB at the moment is the drafting of a patent application (in my name, although it will subsequently be deeded to my corporate masters, of course).

She doesn't work for AJ Park, does she?

**Yokai** · 5th October 2004, 12:24

Originally Posted by jrandom

Hmmm. The same lines were trotted out when VCRs started turning into a commodity. I'm unconvinced of the real commercial impact.

Ah - but the VCR problem is slightly different - there was no mass distribution network. But I take the point. The issue with Downloading is that the distribution network is open. I'm quite happy on the other hand for Blockbuster or Civic or whoever to open a website that costs you 99c per download which is time related or something (oh look - there goes DIVX - UGH!)

Originally Posted by jrandom

Demonstrably untrue. If I steal your bike, you no longer have a bike.

True - point taken and accepted for single instance property. The issue here though is that if I have an original (lets say a Van Gogh - "a Van Gogh") and someone takes a copy of that... they have stolen the expression of the idea. That expression of the idea is what is valuable. That there is the theft - the thief has deprived me of the expression of the idea because there is now no way to link that back to me and no way that I can turn around and license it freely or otherwise to anyone else. In order for me to protect myself from this sort of thing, I would have to charge people to come and see the painting. Effectively licensing on a per view basis...

Originally Posted by jrandom

Funnily enough, the job that I'm slacking off from to post on KB at the moment is the drafting of a patent application (in my name, although it will subsequently be deeded to my corporate masters, of course).

She doesn't work for AJ Park, does she?

If you have a standard contract, it won't be deeded to your masters, it already should belong to them. If they don't have an IP clause in their contract, don't deed it to them - license it on a per use basis :-)

Nope - she's a Minterite.

Yo
(btw for those following on - think about this ... you develop the perfect piece of riding gear - the one thing that you want to own, and that maybe a couple of your friends want too. You make 4 of them. Now one of your friends lends it to their friend who copies it. They then sell the copies at 10 dollars a pop. The world buys their copy of your expression of your idea. - What protected you in the first place? Prior art... But you have to go claim that stuff back, and when you do get the damages and restitution, you have to produce it yourself at 25 dollars a pop to reclaim the costs of bringing the suit. But no-one wants to buy it because it's overpriced... That's IP theft guysngals... Oh - anyone wanna burn of the latest Metallica CD?

**jrandom** · 5th October 2004, 12:38

Originally Posted by Yokai

if I have an original (lets say a Van Gogh - "a Van Gogh") and someone takes a copy of that... they have stolen the expression of the idea. That expression of the idea is what is valuable. That there is the theft...

I know. Intellectual property law can certainly confer developmental advantages to any technologically or artistically aware society.

But it is always necessary to view the matter as a means to an end, not a fundamental human right. My right not to have my ideas stolen is not akin to my right to "life, liberty and security of person..."

Originally Posted by Yokai

If you have a standard contract, it won't be deeded to your masters, it already should belong to them.

You'd think so, wouldn't you? And yes, of course I have an IP clause in my contract. But ever since we were bought out by a multi-billion-dollar American conglomerate, our lawyers have been learning to handcuff *and* sedate their victims.