Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
The Internet

Submission + - Why are websites still forcing people to use IE?

DragonTHC writes: "I just visited movielink's website for research. Their site has a nice message saying, "Sorry, but in order to enjoy the Movielink service you must use Internet Explorer 5.0 (or higher) or Mozilla/Firefox with an IE Tab Extension (IE installation required)." While allowing the IETab firefox extension is somewhat progressive, why do companies still force people to use Internet Explorer? Surely the site should work just fine in Firefox? With steady gains in market share by firefox, you would think that webmasters would get the hint. How about any /. users who are webmasters, what are your reasons for forcing IE?"
Unix

Submission + - Define: /etc

ogar572 writes: There has been an ongoing and heated debate around the office concerning the definition of what /etc means on *nix operating systems. One side says "et cetera" per Wikipedia. Another side says it means "extended tool chest" per this gnome mailing list entry or per this Norwegian article. Yet another side says neither, but he doesn't remember exactly what he heard in the past. All he remembers is that he was flamed when he called it "et cetera", but that "extended tool chest" didn't sound right either. So, what does it really mean?
Sun Microsystems

Submission + - Sun joins the Free Software Foundation

Cheeto writes: Sun Microsystems has joined the FSF! Arstechnica is reporting that Sun has joined the corporate patron program, and will be in the same club as other giants such as IBM, Intel, and Google. With Sun releasing Java under the GPL, and the possibility of releasing OpenSolaris under the GPLv3 — do we see Sun now holding the flag of free software instead of Redhat and IBM?
The Courts

Submission + - I violated copyright law. Now what?

An anonymous reader writes: I am US-based and have recently been doing part-time subcontracting work for a friend in the UK who runs her own small marketing firm. She sells a complete branding/identity plan and if that includes a web site refresh, she calls me. The clients do not know who or where I am, or even that the work is being subbed. Like many designers, I often use Corbis and other photo merchants to mock up layouts for review. It is legal to download images ("comps") from Corbis to use offline for the this purpose. If the client likes the design/images, I get a quote from the photo vendor and the client has the option to purchase. If the price is too high, which it often is with Corbis, I turn to less expensive or free alternatives.

One of her clients, for whom I recently designed a site, just received a $25,000 invoice from a law firm in London representing Corbis, who claimed their content was on the client's site. The client of course was frantic when they received the bill and called my marketing friend, who called me. I investigated and sure enough, there were images on the site that were rightfully the property of Corbis, which I put there. In this instance I neglected to swap out the comps with legal images I purchased for the client from another online source before I made the site live. As a designer I respect content rights and did not, would not, maliciuosly steal images. The client and my friend had no idea.

I moved quickly to correct the situation — scrubbed the site and looked through other clients' sites to make sure nothing else had gotten through. I called Corbis and told their legal department what happened and they told me I would have to deal with the law firm, who handles "all our overseas affairs." I then sent a certified letter to the law firm telling them what happened in an attempt to exonerate the client, and by default, my friend. That was today.

I quoted the images in question on the Corbis site and the total would have been about $800. I did my due-googling and in the spectrum of copyright infringement, I want to believe I'm closer to the speeder than I am the serial-killer. Other photo houses (Getty) send out cease and desist letter and it's done. There is mention of similar situations on some forums, especially in the UK, but I can't seem to find any precedent as to what my fate might be. Does anyone have any idea? I made about $1,000 for the site about a year ago, and as much as it would pain me, would be willing to give that up to make this go away. But something tells me this is going to get ugly.
Businesses

Submission + - Registerfly - do you know where your domain is?

hookmeister writes: "If you registered your domain at Registerfly.com, then you should know it may be locked, and you are at the moment unable to access it through registerfly.com's website. The story as a video. You may even have an un-renewable situation where your domain expires into a status known as redemption through no fault of your own. By all accounts there are just under 2 million domains at risk here, ENOM dumped them as a reseller, Its a Mess... Once clue is that thier SSL cert expired.

Fortunately there is some good news. The Principals in this are trying to restore order. A website www.Registerflies.com (originally crafted as a gripe-zone and forum for regsiterfly users) has gotten inside the ranks of the Regsiterfly management shakeup, made some friends and connections and is creating a back-door problem reporting form that goes directly to those that can correct a domain problem. (The RegisterFly support ticketing system is clogged with thousands of Un-answered complaints.) Go HERE and get at the top of the list, or follow it as the situation evolves."
The Courts

Submission + - Couple who catch cop speeding could face charges.

a_nonamiss writes: "A Georgia couple, apparently tired of people speeding past their house, installed a camera and radar gun on their property. After it was installed, they caught a police office going 17MPH over the posted limit. They brought this to the attention of the local police department, and are now being forced to appear in front of a judge to answer to charges of stalking.

from the article:

The Sipples allegedly caught Kennesaw police officer Richard Perrone speeding up to 17 mph over the speed limit. Perrone alerted Bartow authorities, who in turn visited the Sipples' home to tell them Perrone intended to press charges against them for stalking.
I have the utmost respect for most law enforcement. They have a difficult, dangerous and mostly thankless job to do, but shouldn't they be held accountable for casually breaking the very same laws they are supposed to be enforcing? Additionally, shouldn't we, as citizens, have the right to be able to bring this to someone's attention without having to face laughably bogus charges for our efforts?"
The Courts

Blizzard Officially Files Against WoW Glider 179

Marcus Eikenberry writes "Blizzard and Vivendi today filed against MDY Industries, the makers of the 'WoW Glider' software. Glider allows World of Warcraft players to 'play' while away from the keyboard; the software moves the player's avatar along a set path, following a complex set of instructions dictated in advance. Blizzard is seeking injunctive relief and money damages against MDY. What that means is they want him to stop the production of WoW Glider and they want him to pay them damages. Blizzard believes that Glider infringes on their intellectual property. They believe Glider allows players to cheat, giving them an unfair advantage and that they believe Glider encourages Blizzard customers to breach their contracts for playing the game. Last they claim that Glider is designed to circumvent copyright protections."

Slashdot Top Deals

"If you can, help others. If you can't, at least don't hurt others." -- the Dalai Lama

Working...