Techrights Is Still A Team Effort
Janet Denzel
And if you cannot exercise those rights, they're as good as non-existent. "Basically," said this friend, "but I realize that it is important to understand that the rights do exist regardless of the illegal (but widely accepted) behavior of various companies."
In the area of multimedia there are also many software patents and they're being used to intimidate/blackmail developers (some, including Unified Patents, initiate proceedings to invalidate them in Europe and the US, but not as fast as new ones get granted). Some people who make Kodi distributions, who have not done anything to run afoul of copyright law, are being targeted by lawyers who make patent claims, typically via patent trolls or "assertion" entities.
Our team still speaks to one distro developer who does Kodi, but we don't talk about the pertinent details publicly. So yes, it's about software patents, so he consults various groups that understand the topic. "Kodi is a program but it can be packaged into a single-purpose distro or two," my friend said, and "the fight against software patents needs as many skilled people as possible."
Lakka was mentioned on the Web a few days ago and OSMC is still going despite prior setbacks. But unless or until we eliminate all software patents, there cannot be peace of mind for coders. There are trolls working in the dark, blackmailing Free software developers, and the IBM-connected OIN won't tell the public about that, as it doesn't give a shit about community-run distros and apparently it does not even reply to developers!
The OIN issue isn't a new one and many recognise this by now. We already saw that and wrote about it a decade ago, as we sought to make it widely understood that OIN works for IBM, i.e. for lobbyists in favour of software patents.
What we expect to happen in years to come is more ad hominem assault/skulduggery against community actors, notably rms, Professor Moglen etc. (mostly high-profile people) because the goal is to eliminate community voices, usually under the guise of "safe space" with some "Code of Conduct" brought up (pretext for banishing reasonable people).
Folks doing similar activism, or simply writing about these issues, are being censored. In some cases there are efforts (by IBM and Debian) to even hijack their domains in order to silence them. Well, in practice it's hard to mute them all because it doesn't scale well and it is expensive. They need to actually try to refute claims, but that's harder than hijacking people's domain/s (DNS namespace lawfare).
The same militants who attacked us in recent years also attack Daniel Pocock, Professor Moglen, and others. They use the same sockpuppets (reused and repurposed), so it's not hard to see the pattern (yes, they have harassed them too). Threatening behaviour like this only contributes to the idea that the "diversity" crowd is a bunch of aggressive trolls.
Thanks for all your leadership, Stphane. LXD has been amazing tool for me in my homelab and I would happily use it in a work setting given the chance. Good luck in your future endeavors and I look forward to seeing what other amazing things you can create!
Hi,
Since I got to learn about LXD, it has formed a very central part of my long term cloud system that I hoped to share with developers in the course of this year. I have always appreciated the devoted lxd support team. I followed and learnt a lot from your posts.
The emerging developments are disappointing but I am still optimistic there is light at the end of the tunnel. Given your in depth knowledge on lxd, I have always hoped one day I would be able to have to share with you some of my work. I thought this would happen while you were still with lxd. I would want to believe that this will still be possible.
I wish you well in all your endeavors.
[the content of website link attached is under development ]
Merci pour cet norme travail sur LXD et pour toutes les fois o tu as pu sauver mes serveurs auto hberg en trouvant la solution mes problmes bizarres posts sur le forum. Je te souhaite plein de russite pour la suite !
Bummer, sad to see you leaving. Just wanted to say thank you very much for all of your hard work and dedication to lxc/lxd. Watched your youtube sessions and it was always great to see someone so enthusiastic about what they are working on, also times logging
some question to the forum and getting answers from you and other dev guys was great.
Thank you for your immense involvement in the LXD project, both from a technical and communication point of view, enabling us to democratize (a little) the use of this super-powerful tool for so many uses in computing and server management.
I hope you find the job and occupations that make you happy!
Merci beaucoup !
It was because of your detailed video tutorials that led me to learn, love, and use LXD on my production servers. Although I could barely understand a word you were saying, I was in awe of your LXD engineering skills.
The contents of this document do not have the force and effect of law and are not meant to bind the public in any way. This document is intended only to provide clarity to the public regarding existing requirements under the law or agency policies.
PURPOSE: This transmittal covers the issuance of the Enforcement Guidance on Pregnancy Discrimination and Related Issues. This document provides guidance regarding the Pregnancy Discrimination Act and the Americans with Disabilities Act as they apply to pregnant workers.
Congress enacted the Pregnancy Discrimination Act (PDA) in 1978 to make clear that discrimination based on pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions is a form of sex discrimination prohibited by Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII).[1] Thus, the PDA extended to pregnancy Title VII's goals of "'[achieving] equality of employment opportunities and remov[ing] barriers that have operated in the past to favor an identifiable group of . . . employees over other employees.'"[2]
By enacting the PDA, Congress sought to make clear that "[p]regnant women who are able to work must be permitted to work on the same conditions as other employees; and when they are not able to work for medical reasons, they must be accorded the same rights, leave privileges and other benefits, as other workers who are disabled from working."[3] The PDA requires that pregnant employees be treated the same as non-pregnant employees who are similar in their ability or inability to work.[4]
In the years since the PDA was enacted, charges alleging pregnancy discrimination have increased substantially. In fiscal year (FY) 1997, more than 3,900 such charges were filed with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) and state and local Fair Employment Practices Agencies, but in FY 2013, 5,342 charges were filed.
In 2008, a study by the National Partnership for Women & Families found that pregnancy discrimination complaints have risen at a faster rate than the steady influx of women into the workplace.[7] This suggests that pregnant workers continue to face inequality in the workplace.[8] Moreover, the study found that much of the increase in these complaints has been fueled by an increase in charges filed by women of color. Specifically, pregnancy discrimination claims filed by women of color increased by 76% from FY 1996 to FY 2005, while pregnancy discrimination claims overall increased 25% during the same time period.
The issues most commonly alleged in pregnancy discrimination charges have remained relatively consistent over the past decade. The majority of charges include allegations of discharge based on pregnancy. Other charges include allegations of disparate terms and conditions of employment based on pregnancy, such as closer scrutiny and harsher discipline than that administered to non-pregnant employees, suspensions pending receipt of medical releases, medical examinations that are not job related or consistent with business necessity, and forced leave.[9]
Title I of the ADA protects individuals from employment discrimination on the basis of disability, limits when and how an employer may make medical inquiries or require medical examinations of employees and applicants for employment, and requires that an employer provide reasonable accommodation for an employee or applicant with a disability.[10] While pregnancy itself is not a disability, pregnant workers and job applicants are not excluded from the protections of the ADA. Changes to the definition of the term "disability" resulting from enactment of the ADA Amendments Act of 2008 (ADAAA) make it much easier for pregnant workers with pregnancy-related impairments to demonstrate that they have disabilities for which they may be entitled to a reasonable accommodation under the ADA.[11] Reasonable accommodations available to pregnant workers with impairments that constitute disabilities might include allowing a pregnant worker to take more frequent breaks, to keep a water bottle at a work station, or to use a stool; altering how job functions are performed; or providing a temporary assignment to a light duty position.
Part I of this document provides guidance on Title VII's prohibition against pregnancy discrimination. It describes the individuals to whom the PDA applies, the ways in which violations of the PDA can be demonstrated, and the PDA's requirement that pregnant employees be treated the same as employees who are not pregnant but who are similar in their ability or inability to work (with a particular emphasis on light duty and leave policies). Part II addresses the impact of the ADA's expanded definition of "disability" on employees with pregnancy-related impairments, particularly when employees with pregnancy-related impairments would be entitled to reasonable accommodation, and describes some specific accommodations that may help pregnant workers. Part III briefly describes other requirements unrelated to the PDA and the ADA that affect pregnant workers. Part IV contains best practices for employers.
bcf7231420