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

Re: [News] [OSS] Microsoft Patents and OpenDocument Format

  • Subject: Re: [News] [OSS] Microsoft Patents and OpenDocument Format
  • From: The Ghost In The Machine <ewill@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Mon, 21 May 2007 09:11:25 -0700
  • Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy
  • References: <1870093.xNEYS0VHPr@schestowitz.com> <17GdnVn86q-2VtDbnZ2dnUVZ_v_inZ2d@speakeasy.net> <uqe1i4-9uq.ln1@sirius.tg00suus7038.net> <4649015.qy3K6Sy02m@schestowitz.com>
  • User-agent: slrn/0.9.8.1 (Linux)
  • Xref: ellandroad.demon.co.uk comp.os.linux.advocacy:526707
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Roy Schestowitz
<newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
 wrote
on Fri, 18 May 2007 23:38:08 +0100
<4649015.qy3K6Sy02m@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
> __/ [ The Ghost In The Machine ] on Friday 18 May 2007 21:27 \__
>
>> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, John Bailo
>> <jabailo@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>  wrote
>> on Fri, 18 May 2007 08:50:10 -0700
>> <17GdnVn86q-2VtDbnZ2dnUVZ_v_inZ2d@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
>>> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>>>
>>>> | infringe. So on the one hand, Microsoft is saying "Nice standard
>>>> | you've got there," while on the other hand, warning "Implement
>>>> | it if you dare, but only for a price."
>>>
>>> One other thing that people forget is that when Microsoft was acquiring
>>> patents like mad, they kept saying "oh, it's just defensive in case
>>> someone sues us".
>>
>>> Well, now they're on the offensive.
>
>
> They just filed a lot of patent applications and now they say "we have a lot
> of patents, we won't be specific, but be very scared"..

Indeed; gotta love that specificity.  That "XOR cursor
patent" comes to mind.  (#4197590.  This patent is no
longer current and has for some reason vanished from patentstorm.us;
freepatentsonline.com still has it at
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/4197590.html .)

>
>
>>> Come to think of it, I really believe that they know they are the
>>> infringers and so they're striking first.   It's like the murderer
>>> trying to pin the crime on the innocent...
>
>
> Yes, and they tried to do this to PJ, using media 'placements'.
>
>
>> They're not the infringers if they own the patents.
>> Of course, the suit might backfire if the patent is
>> invalidated via prior art or other such.
>> 
>> It's a risk.
>
>
> Not to mention the fact that Microsoft is one of the biigest IP theives of
> all time, if there's such a thing as IP at all.
>

That's part of the risk: goodwill/credibility.  (Goodwill
is amortizable -- a slightly bizarre but logical enough
concept during acquisitions.)

But there is IP, if only because it takes energy (elan,
work, resources, etc.) to develop an initial idea.  Whether
said IP should be protected for 17 months, 17 years,
or 17 centuries is an interesting question generally.

Who should protect it is another interesting question.

-- 
#191, ewill3@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
/dev/signature: Not a text file

-- 
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com


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