Posts by SorenUK 8 publicly visible posts • joined 26 Jul 2017
There is no such thing as stealing someone's song in UK copyright law. The copyright can be infringed by copying the song, the song is not stolen.
The Theft Act (1968) defines 'theft' as: "A person is guilty of theft if he dishonestly appropriates property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving the other of it"
> @Commswonk For the simple reason that people have to pay for it all the time.
Indeed. My dad pays £20 a month for synchronous 120 mbps FTTP. That's way cheaper than the £35 a month I pay for roughly 45 mbps FTTC (incl. line rental). FTTP does not need to be more expensive than the slower FTTC.
The original comment was about use cases, i.e. why people would need faster than 30mbps connections - not about cost. Convenience of having a fast connection is a valid reason for wanting it, even if you are not going to utilise it to it's maximum.
How about just convenience? Who is to say that people must fully utilise their bandwidth all the time?
My 72 y/o dad has a synchronous 120mbps fibre connection that he only really uses for email and a bit of surfing - but he likes that his surfing is snappy. In the past when I tried to provide phone support and navigate a site in parallel with him, it got very confusing when I'd have a page displayed and his was still only partly rendered - no point trying to actually remote desktop as that would slow down his connection even more.
(I didn't push him to get 120mbps but rather he signed up for the lowest speed FTTP at 50 mbps that has since been upgraded to 120 mbps automatically as the lowest tier has improved)
I'm with Perens on this one. Since the kernel and GR's patches must be licensed as GPLv2 (and there is no reasonable expectation that this is likely to change in the future) this will mean that these yet-to-be-developed future patches will also have to be licensed as GPLv2. By trying to introduce additional conditions on the distribution of these future patches now, they will then still be in violation of the GPLv2.
I.e. If they currently release patches version X, with additional conditions for patches version X+1 - then they have a huge problem should they ever attempt to release patches version X+1: Since they have already put additional distribution conditions on such patches they cannot be GPLv2 - thus, they cannot release X+1 patches without violating GPLv2.
Have just been in Denmark 2 weeks ago - and was surprised that my wife (who uses GiffGaff) could get a 4G connection and great speeds - where as I (who use O2) could not get a 4G connection and had a very slow connection - EVEN THOUGH we both connected to the same mobile network in Denmark.
At least now I now why! Shame on you O2!!
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
