"Billary/2008" <F#%K_Liberals@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
wrote in news:kS42i.8488$145.5786@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> "What Me Worry?" <__@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
> news:i6Kdnfdpa_hFTNXbnZ2dnUVZ_u-unZ2d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>
>> "Billary/2008" <F#%K_Liberals@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>> wrote in message news:Vu32i.67044$Ae.5138@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>
>>> "3396 Dead" <22113396Dead@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in
>>> message
>>> news:mL22i.4485$UU.103@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>>
>>>> http://www.rawstory.com/showoutarticle.php?src=http%3A%2F%2
>>>> Fnews.com.com%2FRe****t%2BMicrosoft%2Bsays%2Bopen%2Bsource%2
>>>> Bviolates%2B235%2Bpatents%2F2100-1014_3-6183437.html
>>>>
>>>> Re****t: Microsoft says open source violates 235 patents
>>>> Top Microsoft lawyer alleges in a magazine interview that
>>>> the Linux kernel and OpenOffice.org violate hundreds of
>>>> the company's patents. By Ina Friedand Stephen Shankland
>>>> Staff Writer, CNET News.com
>>>> Published: May 13, 2007, 7:35 PM PDT
>>>> Last modified: May 13, 2007, 8:30 PM PDT
>>>> Tell us what you think about this storyTalkBackE-mail this
>>>> story to a friendE-mailView this story formatted for
>>>> printingPrint Add to your del.icio.usdel.icio.us Digg this
>>>> storyDigg this Re****t: Microsoft says open source violates
>>>> 235 patents
>>>>
>>>> update Microsoft claims that free and open-source software
>>>> violates 235 of its patents, according to a magazine
>>>> re****t published Sunday.
>>>>
>>>> In an interview with Fortune, Microsoft top lawyer Brad
>>>> Smith alleges that the Linux kernel violates 42 Microsoft
>>>> patents, while its user interface and other design
>>>> elements infringe on a further 65. OpenOffice.org is
>>>> accused of infringing 45, along with 83 more in other
>>>> free and open-source programs, according to Fortune.
>>>>
>>>> It is not entirely clear how Microsoft might proceed in
>>>> enforcing these patents, but the company has been
>>>> encouraging large tech companies that depend on Linux to
>>>> ink patent deals, starting with its controversial pact
>>>> with Novell last November. Microsoft has also cited Linux
>>>> protection playing a role in recent patent swap deals with
>>>> Samsung and Fuji Xerox. Microsoft has also had discussions
>>>> but not reached a deal with Red Hat, as noted in the
>>>> Fortune article.
>>>>
>>>> Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer is also quoted in the article
>>>> as saying Microsoft's open-source competitors need to
>>>> "play by the same rules as the rest of the business."
>>>>
>>>> "What's fair is fair," Ballmer told Fortune. "We live in a
>>>> world where we honor, and sup****t the honoring of,
>>>> intellectual property."
>>>>
>>>> The story notes that some big tech proponents of open
>>>> source have been stockpiling intellectual property as part
>>>> of the Open Invention Network, set up in 2005 by folks
>>>> like Sony, Red Hat, IBM, NEC and Philips. The article
>>>> surmises that if Microsoft were to go after open source,
>>>> these companies' combined know-how might give it some
>>>> patent weapons to go after Windows.
>>>>
>>>> A Microsoft representative did not immediately respond to
>>>> an e-mail seeking comment.
>>>>
>>>> Given how deeply entrenched open-source software has
>>>> become in the computing industry, taking direct legal
>>>> action against the open-source realm would be a
>>>> complicated, hackle-raising undertaking for Microsoft.
>>>> Customers use open-source software widely, and many major
>>>> computing companies--IBM, Dell, Sun Microsystems,
>>>> Hewlett-Packard, Motorola and Oracle, for example--sup****t
>>>> Linux work directly.
>>>>
>>>> It's not the first time that open-source patent concerns
>>>> have arisen. A 2004 study by a Open Source Risk
>>>> Management, a company selling insurance against risks of
>>>> using open-source software, concluded that Linux could
>>>> violate at least 283 patents, 27 of them Microsoft
>>>> patents.
>>>>
>>>> Patents and the open-source movement get along awkwardly
>>>> at best. Patent law gives proprietary, exclusive rights to
>>>> patent holders, but open-source programming is built on
>>>> the idea of free sharing. Newer open-source licenses
>>>> sometimes address the issue by requiring contributors to
>>>> open-source projects to grant users and developers of
>>>> the software a perpetual, royalty-free license to any
>>>> patents that relate to the contribution.
>>>> Now on News.com
>>>> Re****t: Microsoft says open source violates 235 patents
>>>> Most hated blogger on the planet? Photos: Engineering
>>>> lessons learned from Katrina Extra: Online radio remixes
>>>> the future of music
>>>>
>>>> Different companies have dealt in different ways with the
>>>> open-source patent conundrum. For example, HP has taken a
>>>> pro-patent stance, while IBM, Nokia, Sun and others have
>>>> granted some rights to use some of their patents in
>>>> open-source software.
>>>>
>>>> The Open Invention Network remains a relatively young
>>>> effort, but it has attracted participation this year from
>>>> proprietary software giant Oracle and from Linux sup****t
>>>> seller Canonical. A company may license the network's
>>>> patents for free as long as they promise not to assert any
>>>> patent claims against those involved in the "Linux
>>>> environment."
>>>>
>>>> The Free Software Foundation is working on a new draft of
>>>> the General Public License, one element of which will ban
>>>> partner****ps such as the one struck by Novell and
>>>> Microsoft.
>>>
>>> The Linux geeks love to bash MSFT. Yet they love to copy
>>> the features and funtionality of MSFT products. They only
>>> wish they had a product half as powerful and feature rich
>>> as MSFT has. The Linux geeks are nothing but a bunch of
>>> thieves intent on destroying the rights of intellectual
>>> property owners.
>>
>> Billary, try pulling your head out of your ass at least once
>> a month...
>>
>> Linux's kernel is based upon open-source codebases dating
>> back to the early days of UNIX. The user interface runs on
>> top of the open-sourced X-windows system. These codebases
>> were in use before the earliest version of Windows, which
>> was developed *in response to* the X-windows and the [then
>> dominant] Macintosh operating system. It was Microsoft that
>> copied its features and GUI design from Apple (who copied it
>> from Xerox PARC in the late 1970's), not the other way
>> around.
>>
>> Since the open source movement is very strict about only
>> using open sourced codebases, and since another company
>> (SCO) has already attempted to sue Linux out of existence -
>> and failed miserably - I don't think anybody is too worried
>> about Microsoft. If they're smart, they'll co-opt Linux
>> (embrace and extend) rather than attempt to sue it out of
>> existence (which will fail). They're likely attempting a
>> multi-pronged attack.
>>
>> It its infamous lawsuit, SCO claimed that it had evidence of
>> significant patent infringement in the Linux codebase. As
>> it turned out, they were lying. They had nothing. Nada.
>> Zilch. The case was thrown out - but not until their stock
>> had soared many months, making the execs and their lawyers
>> very rich. MSFT is very likely attempting a more expensive
>> version of the SCO gambit: Spew massive FUD all over the
>> headlines, drag the case out for a couple of years, watch
>> your stock climb as you threaten large Linux shops
>> (especially recent converts) with crippling lawsuits should
>> they continue to resist Microsoft's expensive, bloated,
>> insecure, bug-ridden, proprietary products. Typical
>> monopolist tactics.
>>
>> There's a reason that Microsoft has been likened to the
>> alient "Borg" from Star Trek. Resistance is futile.
>>
>
> Take YOUR head out of YOUR ass. MSFT isn't trying to kill
> Linux, they're trying to defend their patents. Any owner of
> intellectual property would do the same. You're so critical
> of the MS-OS yet assholes like you aren't qualified to write
> a single line of code beyond "hello world". So shut the ****
> up you thief.
And Bill stole windows from Steve who stole it from Xerox
So shut the **** up, you thief.
|
