For instance, in Poland (which is in Europe) you have all rights to create copies of software, music, movies, for your personal use after paying for the original copy. You cannot do this under copyright which strictly forbids you from creating copies of the original media. Copy-right, as a right to create copies.
In this meaning, copyright is not the same as authorship rights, which is a basis of intellectual property protection in Europe.
Similarly for software patents, they do not work in EU.
Not only that, the article being from American media, even with the footnote, the commenters, miss the whole point about copyright being exclusively American concept and we don’t have this in EU. We have IP and authorship rights that work differently. See last part for explanation: https://thehftguy.com/2020/09/15/french-judge-rules-gpl-lice...
They also failed to grasp that outside temperature might not be the only factor affecting power consumed for heating, assuming we want to keep constant inside temperature. The most obvious is sunlight - when it's 0C outside, my home requires much less energy when the sun is shining through the windows and on the roof.
Official SEC document regarding regulation SHO describes both illegal and legal cases when you can "just" fail to deliver [0]. Market makers which also happen to have hedge-fund branches are having the most flexibility in this.
You can Fail-to-deliver and never locate the stock that you are supposed to borrow. Or you can short ETF with this specific company in basket while going long on anything else in this ETF.
Everything you own, even your own debt, can be used as a collateral by creating and selling swaps.
Maybe I misremembered something and cannot find a source now, but I think there was some way to avoid paying tax on short sales when company goes bankrupt and gets delisted.
EDIT: See sibling comment.
EDIT 2: Am I reading this right? almost 1,800,000 shares failed to deliver just in one day of Sep 22nd? [0]
I have 2 gift cards and one additional "LunchPass" card issued this year in Poland, all three are magstrip only.
The magstrip readers are not removed from the terminals, even the newest smartphone-like have them, you just don't know where to look. Of course, sometimes cashiers are surprised that my card is magstrip-only and they are double-surprised when I show them where is the magstrip reader on the terminal they use :)
In addition this article is also strongly opinionated, charged with emotions, feels like stitched together without second reading IMHO. Like:
> It would allow operators to procure [...] with different players to piece together a 5G network, breaking the market power of “end-to-end” vendors like Ericsson and Nokia.
And later:
> the O-RAN Alliance. It's a standard-setting body that includes [...] leading vendors Ericsson and Nokia.
First, it doesn't work like that. They will still offer end-to-end deals, even with ORAN, it's just that winning conditions change. Second, why would companies support standardization effort that is supposedly intended to "harm" them? :D
> The operators, now barred by governments from using Huawei in several European markets, see Open RAN as a fix to what they consider a duopoly in the vendor market that allows Ericsson and Nokia to charge higher prices for 5G equipment.
I LOL'ed. From what I know, Ericsson and Nokia does not charge higher prices for 5G equipment due to duopoly, because that would be called price collusion and the journalists don't have proof to back it up. Also, Ericsson and Nokia are fighting each other for every piece of market share, I don't see how pumping up the prices would help here.
Recently Nokia strongly communicates its commitment to Open-RAN. They want to be like Tesla or Toyota (in case of hybrid-drives): so good that competition is unable to keep up even after opening their patents. Once telcos grasp the benfits of open-interfaces infrastructure (eCPRI and stuff), there is no coming back to closed ecosystems.
The "radio protocol" is "open" since GSM, anyone can download standards from 3GPP and implement it accordingly. But the mere amount of knowledge and specialized hardware required to do this, even for single layer like L1, is tremendous. I think this is the real reason why we don't already have open-source implementation of the full stack.
EDIT: an afterthought - maybe the O-RAN is really a chance for open-source here. In the future, once O-RAN is accepted and widely deployed, we could work on implementing the stack piece-by-piece, layer-by-layer, filling the gaps with commercial software/hardware as we go, instead of doing everything at once...
I have the same bad experience with Broadcom's technical support. I worked on a project based around StrataXGS Tomahawk and some other chip I can't remember right now. One of those chipsets would randomly lock itself and stop switching traffic somewhere about 5-6 minutes after rebooting. It took us ONE WHOLE FREAKING YEAR of debugging on our side and nagging them to make them figure out that they forgot to tell us that some specific PCI-E clock settings must be set in THEIR OWN DRIVER. It was paid support. Imagine the horrors of dev team whose product gets delayed one year and now imagine their faces after Broadcom provided the solution.
Also, their requests to plug in "logic analyzer" on the PCI-E bus between host CPU and their chipset in finished product where everything was using BGA soldered parts - yeah...
I believe the only reason everything they share with you is under NDA so you don't go and publicly tell how bad they really are. They are like Boeing to me, but I yet have to see their MAX-like mistake.
In this meaning, copyright is not the same as authorship rights, which is a basis of intellectual property protection in Europe.
Similarly for software patents, they do not work in EU.