Our discussion seems to overfloat topic seamlessly :) In any case we're reveal some other 'unclear phrases' as I think.
2010/5/4 Ineiev <address@hidden>
If a man can be an army, a man can easily be a company; generally, all companies
are run by some people.
Absolutely right. I mean man without company status, unemployed for that and don't receiving any fee from coding that piece of software, except maybe donations or other form of free-will encouragement.
> I'm sure about few :) Why? Just because I know there're no reason to spy forThat is, you don't know any reason to spy (?)
> them (people coding that software). Just because.
However, I think you are right, there must be some proprietary players
which are not spyware.
True. I clearly understand possible reason for spying. But I meant my sure about few people, which project are not open-source and in the same time not contain any spyware code. Just because it is meaningless for them.
> It is free-will assignation of data to company.* Would the end user actually add those EULA clauses
if the EULA were written by the end user?
Sorry, I can't catch your words. EULA written by the end user? I always think that EULA's are written by the companies...
* Is the end user typically aware of those clauses?
If those clauses included in EULA, it is problems of end-user if he's not give full attention to what he 'Agree, Continue' :) That's legal education issue I think.
> If it is not in EULA it must be punished by law.* There are a lot of ethical issues the law does not cover.
* What we want is to stop the companies mistreat the users
rather than to punish anybody.
Agree. But don't you think that in worst case, when some company include some spyware in code and DON'T aware about it end-user in any clear form - that need to be punished? I think almost all countries have laws about privacy, like said in UN Human Rights.
>> But the paragraph does compare MP3 and Ogg Vorbis.Probably the wording is careless, indeed. I thought it implied MP3 because
> Really? Where exactly? I see only comparison about relative size.
the page did not mention other proprietary formats (even in form
Do you think it can be reworded like
"You don't lose any technical quality with Ogg."
(with no particular codec format specified)?
Technically speaking 'You lose some quality', but generally speaking phrase could exist as 'You don't lose any sensible quality with Ogg. Practically.' But I must repeat my words about my skills in English - they're not good.
From me too again, Oleg