On Fri, 24 Mar 2006 18:23:01 +0000, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
> __/ [ B Gruff ] on Friday 24 March 2006 18:21 \__
>> On Friday 24 March 2006 06:21 Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>>> | Ballmer: Well, I think there are experts who claim Linux violates |
>>> our intellectual property. I'm not going to comment.
>> He "thinks that there are experts who claim...."?
>> Ye gods. Conversely, I KNOW that there are courts that have
> Title: "Microsoft Loses Office Patent Dispute"
> Notice the last sentence in that article:
> ,----[ Quote ]
> | "Office 2003 users will need to upgrade to Service Pack 2; Office | XP
> users will need to apply a patch." `----
> Joy O' Joy. How simple and user-friendly.
The question for companies, though, is if they are exposing themselves to
potential legal liability if they don't quickly move to the new software.
Microsoft promises to indemnify customers from third-party patent claims,
but Silver said the license terms also require customers to "immediately"
move to any new noninfringing version that Microsoft releases.
So much for indemnifying their customers. I wonder what new EULA terms
will be on the updates?
In the end though, it comes down to a problem with the whole concept of