Home Messages Index
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index

Re: Micoshaft has taken the bait - makes identical SCO$ claims

  • Subject: Re: Micoshaft has taken the bait - makes identical SCO$ claims
  • From: Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Sun, 19 Nov 2006 20:36:05 +0000
  • Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy
  • Organization: schestowitz.com / Netscape
  • References: <0H08h.3207$k74.1019@text.news.blueyonder.co.uk> <ALKdnWGAlLC7Nv3YnZ2dnUVZ_uCdnZ2d@comcast.com>
  • Reply-to: newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • User-agent: KNode/0.7.2
__/ [ Geico Caveman ] on Sunday 19 November 2006 19:06 \__

> 7 wrote:
> 
>> 
>> Micoshaft unambigiously claims their IP is
>> in open source projects without proof - just like SCO$.
>> 
>> http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,2060797,00.asp
>> "The second is to recognize, unambiguously, that there is value to
>>  intellectual property within open-source products that are used by
>>  customers and that that intellectual property should be honored."
>> 
>> All this IP infringment talk was dreamt up in cookoo land no doubt.
>> 
>> Micoshaft is now the new SCO$.
>> 
>> Makes you wonder how they got all this together in such a short
>> time unless they were already involved with orchestrating the
>> SCO$ FUD from the beginning and novel crap is just the next logical step
>> of this master FUD plan.
>> 
>> Micoshaft needs to be sued before they sue customers and other companies.
>> 
>> Micoshaft cannot legally distribute SuSE distro and any GPL'd code
>> in there in violation of the GPL if they know there is IP in there
>> that doesn't comply with GPL. If they knowingly ship
>> products in violation of GPL, customers have a right
>> to bring court action to bear on micoshaft for knowingly
>> distributing and selling third party products illegally.
> 
> What makes you think that Microsoft has not been using Novell to secretly
> poison Linux kernel / apps for months before the deal was signed.
> 
> I do not think that folks at Microsoft are that stupid. Of course, it could
> just be FUDware. I think that a wise course of action would be to go back
> and look at each submission from Novell / its employees to the kernel /
> apps going back to the purchase of SuSe. And after excising anything Novell
> added, FSF ought to sue Microsoft for saying these things.

I am beginning to get worries and suspicious. I read the following not so
long ago...

http://reverendted.wordpress.com/2006/08/19/vba-macros-update/

It's just one among a few. It could have percolated elsewhere and I suspect
that just seeing Microsoft code (regardless of implementation) is something
that could hurt in court.

It's all hypothetical, of course. What amazing is that the whole thing has
been going on under everybody's nose (even junior employees who blog). It's
hard to believe that there was contact between the developers, but I suspect
de Icaza knew about this. He did an interview with Port25 last month.

Best wishes,

Roy

-- 
Roy S. Schestowitz      | Windows: slippery when dry. You have been warned.
http://Schestowitz.com  | Free as in Free Beer ¦  PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
Load average (/proc/loadavg): 0.95 0.75 0.50 1/146 16010
      http://iuron.com - semantic search engine project initiative

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index