From MeritBadgeDotOrg

(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
m (Requirement 9.a.: Unsigned)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Merit Badge Talk page header}}
{{Merit Badge Talk page header}}
The requirements were updated in 2009, these requirements are out of date.

Revision as of 12:54, March 24, 2010

This is the Discussion page for discussing improvements to the associated article.
Please place messages concerning errors or requested changes to the protected portions of the article on this Discussion page.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
Articles have been created following a common format for all Merit Badges. Please help keep these articles in this format and help us add links to related requirements for other awards and external requirement resources.
Answers, answer keys, cheat sheets, or links to them will be removed.
When posting on this or any Discussion page:  
  • Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
  • Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~).

  • Contents


    The requirements were updated in 2009, these requirements are out of date.


    although still available, is no longer under development. It's replacement package is called KompoZer, which shares much of the same source code as NVU, but had been updated to current coding standards.

    Requirement 9.a.

    I have concerns about the wording of requirement 9.a. It gives the impression that it is always wrong to give or receive a copy of a computer program that is protected by copyright.

    This is not necessarily true; nearly all open-source software programs are protected by copyright, and they encourage redistribution (i.e. giving copies to friends). For example, not only is it not illegal for me to make a copy of and give it to a friend, it would be encouraged by and Sun Microsystems (the copyright holder).

    The requirement should be that scouts should not accept free copies of copyrighted software if redistribution is restricted. Are others simply adhering strictly to the requirement or going further and explaining it correctly to scouts? --Mryan 20:03, February 6, 2008 (EST)

    I respectfully disagree. There are various types of copyrights and terms-of-usage. OpenOffice is licensed under GPL (Gnu Public License) and other packages fall under Apache or Mozilla Public License agreements, etc. Open source projects are hence deliberately not covered by conventional copyrights precisely in order to avoid this conflict and make this specific distinction. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tjk (talkcontribs) 12:59, October 15, 2009. (Please, sign and date your posts on talk pages.)


    Estrabd 15:10, January 3, 2010 (EST)

    1. how is it that computers is classified in "physical science"? FWIW, I suggest a "field" of Technology be created...but there could be a better way to put it.
    Personal tools