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

Re: OpenDocument Foundation's 'woes' have little to do with OpenDoc Format's future

____/ Rex Ballard on Tuesday 27 November 2007 02:40 : \____

> On Nov 26, 2:55 am, Tim Smith <reply_in_gr...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> In article <5546695.zy6oL3x...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
>>  Roy Schestowitz <newsgro...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> > Microsoft's insiders/Linux traitors appear to deny this on Microsoft's
>> > behalf, but this is all well documented. Another dark secret about OOXML
>> > are the patent liabilities that come with it. Sheesh! Don't tell anyone
>> > that Microsoft apparently still files OOXML-related patents, as lookups in
>> > the WIPO Web sites reveal.
>> No worse than the patent liability of ODF, which you always seem to
>> conveniently overlook.  Why is that?
> Would you like to discuss exactly which patents you are referring
> to?
> Black-Streams could be almost anything, including viruses.  Microsoft
> wants to protect their ability to fold black-stream into an XML
> "envelope".   The Sun version for doing this is to use standard
> uuencode aka Radix60 format, but even this is
> For the patents on ODF, what are the terms to license those patents?
> Are they primarily defensive patents or have the patent owners been
> suing somebody?
> Are the patents even enforcable?
> Was the patent holder also the contributor of record to the Open
> Office implementation?
> I'm not saying you are wrong, but I think there are some significant
> differences between how Microsoft uses it's patents and how companies
> like IBM and Sun use their patents.
> Microsoft has made it very clear that they are willing to make life
> difficult for Linux users who use one of Microsoft's alleged 163
> patents, but they won't tell customers which patents they believe are
> being violated, possibly because there is a very high likelihood that
> if Microsoft does list those patents, the Open Source community could
> nullify them in just a few days.
> IBM and Sun file thousands of patent applications, most of which are
> primarily for the purpose of getting Open Source software NOT
> developed by these companies into the public record.  Even when patent
> applications are rejected, the filings become part of the official
> public record.  Some of these software patents are granted, but even
> then, they are primarily defensive patents, designed to prevent
> fraudulent applicants from getting patents that will be used in hopes
> of huge lawsuits and/or settlements.
> Microsoft has expressed it's willingness to wave enforcement in
> exchange for similar concessions from Linux distributors and OSS
> organizations who are willing to wave enforcement of their patent
> portfolio.  Remember, many OSS organizations and commercial Linux
> distributors have developed and patented substantial portfolios of
> defensive patents.  In many cases, they wave the right to enforce
> these patents when used with OSS licenses such as GPL-3.  They can
> still sue proprietary vendors like Microsoft who attempt to use the
> same technology in proprietary applications such as Windows, Office,
> or other NDA protected "binary only" applications.
>> --Tim Smith
> Rex Ballard

IBM made a big pledge back in August (or thereabouts) not to use its patents
while Microsoft keeps filing OOXML-related patents (WIPO searches reveal
this). Microsoft also gives 'licences' for Linux companies to be 'permitted'
(oh, thank goodness!) to use OpenOffice (and OOXML, I suppose).

Tim Smith spews out Microsoft FUD. That's what he's compensated for.

                ~~ Best of wishes

Roy S. Schestowitz      |    Roughly 2% of your keyboard is O/S-specific
http://Schestowitz.com  |  RHAT GNU/Linux   |     PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
         run-level 2  2007-10-30 19:49                   last=
      http://iuron.com - help build a non-profit search engine

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