badwarez

Благодаря! Останал съм с грешното впечатление, че в заглавието се подреждат по намаляващ ред на версиите.

Възможно ли е да се въведе правило за отбелязване кой точно софтуер е обновен. Нпаример: openSUSE 11.4 Milestone 5 / 11.3 Final да изглежда по различен начин: openSUSE 11.4 Milestone 5* / 11.3 Final или openSUSE 11.4 Milestone 5 / 11.3 Final или openSUSE 11.4 Milestone 5 / 11.3 Final или openSUSE 11.4 Milestone 5 / 11.3 Final или по друг някакъв начин да се отдели точно кой софтуер от групата е обновения. Успешна Нова Година на всички.

2005 SPECIAL 301 REPORT Както се споменава в руската преса излезе специален доклад 301. Полицията използва този доклад като предтекст да атакува дребните интернет доставчици и компютърните клубове. Всеки който може да чете може да се убеди за какво се говори в доклада. За производство на пиратски компактдискове за лошо работещо правосъдие и закони които се въвеждат късно. Къде тук са интернет доставчиците и компютерните клубове не знам, но не виждам съдебната система, народните представители и производителите на компактдискове да са критикувани на първите страници в българската преса. Кои има изгода от изопачаването на фактите и манипулирането на хората всеки да прецени сам. В началото можете да почетете как руснаците се отнасят към доклада за тяхната страна. ---------------- Аппарат торгового представителя США Питера Аллгейера опубликовал ежегодный доклад Special 301, посвященный состоянию дел с защитой прав интеллектуальной собственности в разных странах мира. В докладе говорится, что России так и не удалось добиться ощутимого прогресса в борьбе с пиратством. По данным авторов доклада, уровень пиратства в России не снижается. В индустрии звукозаписи он составляет 66%, в сфере видеопродукции — 80%, на рынке делового ПО — 87%, а развлекательного — 73%. В 2004 г. американские правообладатели понесли $1,7 млрд. ущерба от пиратства в России. Однако лишать нашу страну торговых привилегий американцы не спешат, но обещают в этом году проверить с пристрастием, как именно борются с пиратами в России, сообщают «Ведомости». ------------ 2005 SPECIAL 301 REPORT http://www.ustr.gov/Document_Library/Repor...tion_Index.html ------------ Optical media piracy and trademark counterfeiting are increasing problems in many countries, including Brazil, Bulgaria, China, India, Indonesia, Lebanon, Mexico, Pakistan, Paraguay, the Philippines, Russia, Thailand, Venezuela, and Vietnam. ---------- Controlling Optical Media Production However, other countries urgently need to implement controls or improve existing inadequate measures, including India, Pakistan, Russia, Ukraine, Thailand, and Bulgaria, none of which have made sufficient progress in this regard. ---------- BULGARIA Bulgaria is being retained on the Watch List in 2005 due to the dire need for improvements in its IPR regime, particularly with respect to anti-piracy and anti-counterfeiting enforcement efforts. Copyright piracy has increased in the past few years, after a period of dramatic decline in the mid- to late-1990’s. The Bulgarian Government has not taken effective steps to stop the increase in piracy and counterfeiting activity. The U.S. copyright industry reports that this past year Bulgaria had high rates of optical disc piracy, estimating that approximately 70 percent of all foreign sound recordings produced in Bulgaria were illegal copies. Pirated CDs and DVDs are increasingly available throughout the country. We are encouraged by recent reports that the Bulgarian Government is taking steps to implement a new optical media licensing system, including current efforts by Bulgaria’s Parliament to pass its optical disc legislation. However, the U.S. copyright industry reports that the proposed optical disc legislation needs to be amended in certain respects prior to its adoption. We will continue to closely watch these legislative developments in Bulgaria. In addition, we recommend that Bulgaria amend its criminal code and criminal procedure code to correct severe shortcomings which undercut the possibility of effective enforcement. For example, we hope that Bulgaria will improve its polycarbonate import registration scheme, an important tool for addressing optical disc piracy. With respect to IPR enforcement, Bulgarian police authorities have increased their cooperation with rights holders. However, despite some progress in the area of enforcement, enforcement of the current optical disc licensing regime is ineffective. Judicial trials are replete with extensive delays and convicted pirates and counterfeiters usually receive only minimal sentences. There are currently eight known operational optical disc plants in Bulgaria, with the output of those plants far exceeding the country’s legitimate demand. In addition, production and smuggling of counterfeit distilled spirits has continued to grow. While Bulgaria has increased its investigations into the sources of counterfeit production and distribution, no criminal charges have been filed as a result of these inquiries. We remain concerned with the increases in copyright piracy and trademark counterfeiting, and the United States will continue to monitor Bulgaria’s near-term progress in combating these illegal activities. ---------- In this year’s review, USTR devotes special attention to the need for significantly improved enforcement against counterfeiting and piracy. We place particular emphasis on the ongoing campaign to reduce production of unauthorized copies of optical media products such as compact discs (CDs), video compact discs (VCDs), digital versatile discs (DVDs), and compact disc read-only memory (CD-ROMs), as well as on the counterfeiting of trademarked goods. Optical media piracy and trademark counterfeiting are increasing problems in many countries, including Brazil, Bulgaria, China, India, Indonesia, Lebanon, Mexico, Pakistan, Paraguay, the Philippines, Russia, Thailand, Venezuela, and Vietnam. At issue in these and other countries is the foreign governments’ political will to effectively address piracy and counterfeiting. In addition, USTR continues to focus on other critically important issues, including Internet piracy, proper implementation of the TRIPS Agreement by developed and developing country WTO Members, and full implementation of TRIPS standards by new WTO Members at the time of their accession. USTR also continues to insist that other countries’ government ministries use only authorized software. ---------- Controlling Optical Media Production Over the past year some of our trading partners, such as the Philippines, Poland, and Indonesia, have taken important steps toward implementing much-needed controls on optical media production in order to address and prevent future pirate activity. We have seen particular progress this year in the Philippines’ enforcement of its optical media law. However, other countries urgently need to implement controls or improve existing inadequate measures, including India, Pakistan, Russia, Ukraine, Thailand, and Bulgaria, none of which have made sufficient progress in this regard. Some governments, such as those of Hong Kong and Macau, which implemented optical media controls in previous years, have clearly demonstrated their commitment to continue to enforce these measures. Malaysia is steadily improving its enforcement efforts, and Taiwan continues to make significant progress in providing improved IPR enforcement. The effectiveness of such measures is underscored by the direct experience of these governments in successfully reducing pirate production of optical media. We continue to urge our trading partners facing the threat of pirate optical media production within their borders to adopt similar controls or aggressively enforce existing regulations in the coming year. ---------- However, because of the considerable effort involved in producing the safety and efficacy data needed to obtain marketing approval, the TRIPS Agreement requires that the original applicant must receive protection for that data against unfair commercial use. Accordingly, the United States and other countries provide a period of protection during which second-comers may not rely on the data submitted by the innovative company to obtain approval for their copies of the product. This means that, during the period of exclusivity, the data provided by the originator cannot be relied upon by regulatory officials to approve similar products. This period of protection is five years in the United States and six to ten years in the EU Member States. Other countries that provide a period of protection against reliance on data include Australia, China, Japan, Jordan, Korea, Mexico, New Zealand, and Switzerland. We commend Bulgaria on its recent implementation of data protection for pharmaceutical and agricultural chemical products. We urge all WTO members to swiftly complete their implementation of TRIPS Article 39.3, including certain Andean countries, Israel and Turkey.

Моите уважения дали български начин на мислене е да отидеш при работодателя с отлична диплома от следване и/или добри препоръки от предишния работодател т.е. доказателства че можеш и работиш добре и тои да ти каже заплата с която можеш да си купиш само храна и нищо повече. Това е реалността за повечето българи. Искаме ли младите хора да остават трябва да могат със заплатата на двама работещи в семейството да изхранват и обличат себе си и две деца плюс наем или закупуване на жилище ( и подмяна на колата с нова на всеки 10 години). Никои не е лаком и не иска като в другите страни с една заплата да издържа 5 членно семейство или жена му да се грижи за детето и да получава пари за това 5 години от държавата, а не 1 година както е при нас. Както виждаш не сме лакоми но мизериата си е мизериа и това го разбират много добре всички в България. В Европа ни съжаляват и се притесняват от проблема - бъди сигурен в това. Не искам заради желанието на някой да забогатеят да съом обект на съжаление вместо на уважение. Може би и други не искат това и предпочитат трудния път да се докажат там където ги ценят не само на думи но и материално.

Принцип 6: Ограничена отговорност на провайдерите на услуги по Интернет Страните-членки не би трябвало да налагат на провайдерите на услуги общото задължение да наблюдават съдържанието на Интернет, до който осигуряват достъп, което пренасят или съхраняват, нито да търсят активно факти или обстоятелства, указващи за незаконна дейност. Това май нашите приатели от специалните служби не са го прочели добре. Да не си докарат някой проблем с съда в хага, че пак народа ще плаща за недомислиците им.