Hackers != Crackers
,----[ Quote ]
| Furthermore, to all those Ubuntu haters out there who think Mark Shuttleworth
| is a cracker just because he is making GNU/Linux more accessable to future
| hackers, I’ll have you know he is really a brother from South Africa!
| Throughout history crackers have been destructive, particularly towards
| hackers. Some of the real hackers were Native Americans who studied the
| source code of the land water and sky. They shared their knowledge with
| everyone so that all could live from the land free, but some newbies to this
| continent only wanted to plunder what they could and took any wisdom for
| granted. These crackers took the seeds of corn (like some immature
| script-kiddie) and claimed to “pwn” the land. They DDOSed the buffallo and
| spread deadly viruses in the form of “freeware” blankets and created poverty
| with “adware” currencies and promises (not to be confused with the “Free Open
| Source” life the Native peoples once had). Much of the documentation and
| wisdom has been lost or destroyed, but fortunately the source code is still
| in tact. There is, however a new danger because much is being done through
| litigation, lies and greed to lay proprietary claim on everything including
| life itself.
`----
http://www.freelikegnu.org/?p=51
Recent:
McAfee's libel against open source
,----[ Quote ]
| Someone at McAfee thinks that the correlation between botnets and open source
| is clear, but I am struggling to grasp any connection between the two.
| Perhaps this is just one more example of McAfee's dubious grasp on reality
| when it comes to open source. Remember its statement that open-source
| licensing is a threat to its business?
`----
http://www.cnet.com/8301-13505_1-9917989-16.html?part=rss&tag=feed&subj=TheOpenRoad
Why Are the Feds Still Gunning for McAfee's Former GC?
,----[ Quote ]
| But things didn't quite work out that way. Eight years later, Roberts is
| preparing for his felony trial on two counts of mail fraud, one count of wire
| fraud, three counts of false Securities and Exchange Commission filings, and
| one count of falsifying books and records. If convicted on all seven counts,
| Roberts faces a maximum of 140 years in prison and more than $10 million in
| fines. He is also fighting a suit by the SEC for securities fraud and is a
| defendant with McAfee in two derivative suits over backdating. The SEC
| complaint called Roberts' repricing "a fraudulent scheme to enrich himself."
| Roberts pled not guilty to the criminal charges and denied the SEC
| allegations.
|
| Roberts' attorney, Neal Stephens, a partner at Cooley Godward Kronish in Palo
| Alto, Calif., said that neither he nor Roberts would comment for this
| article. McAfee spokesman Joris Evers says, "McAfee does not discuss former
| employees."
`----
http://www.law.com/jsp/ihc/PubArticleIHC.jsp?id=1200650739414
McAfee to pay $13.8 million to settle backdating lawsuits
,----[ Quote ]
| McAfee has taken two major steps toward closing the stock-option backdating
| scandal that has plagued the company for the past two years.
`----
http://news.yahoo.com/s/infoworld/20071222/tc_infoworld/94209
We’re not thieves. We just can’t read contracts (McAfee and Open Source)
,----[ Quote ]
| There is a lot of FUD (Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt) spread about Free/Libre
| and Open Source (FLOSS) licenses. While companies dependant on older
| competing business models suggest these licenses are complex or “ambiguous”,
| the reality is quite the opposite.
`----
http://blogs.itworldcanada.com/insights/2008/01/11/we%E2%80%99re-not-thieves-we-just-can%E2%80%99t-read-contracts-mcafee-and-open-source/
http://tinyurl.com/39pjml
McAfee throws some FUD at the GPL
,----[ Quote ]
| In its annual report, Windows security software vendor McAfee told its
| investors that open source software licence terms it vaguely characterised
| as " ambiguous" might "result in unanticipated obligations regarding our
| products."
|
| [...]
|
| That statement says several things. First, it reveals that McAfee does use at
| least some open source software derived code in its products. Second, it
| betrays that McAfee has misappropriated that open source software and thus is
| committing copyright infringement, because it doesn't distribute that open
| source software derivative source code. Third, by calling its products that
| include open source software code "proprietary", McAfee shows that it really
| doesn't want to shoulder its GPL licence obligations, but instead wants to
| both have its cake and eat it too.
`----
http://www.theinquirer.net/gb/inquirer/news/2008/01/05/mcafee-throws-fud-gpl
|
|
