____/ Jim Richardson on Saturday 09 February 2008 10:22 : \____
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On Sat, 09 Feb 2008 02:55:20 +0000,
> [H]omer <spam@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>> Verily I say unto thee, that NG spake thusly:
>>> 7 wrote:
>>
>>>> I think patent laws need to be changed. If a company aquires a
>>>> patent, and it knows of an infringing party, then the intent to
>>>> deal with it must be registered with the patent office from the
>>>> date of knowledge within 48 hours or lose the right to sue. A
>>>> letter must be sent to the infringer on the same date. The
>>>> infringer notices must be on public record for all to see. The
>>>> registration must also state if this infringement is thought to
>>>> have come about due to seredipity or believed to be malicious. If
>>>> its recorded as malicious, then some accompanying evidence must be
>>>> deposed at the time stating why it is malicious.
>>>
>>> Thank god you're not in charge of anything, as all the people on the
>>> world would be at each other's throat, as that's how much you would
>>> have the world messed-up.
>>
>> Well which is better; innuendo (i.e. FUD) or hard facts and evidence?
>>
>> If someone was spreading rumours around your town that you were a
>> rapist, would you just accept those false allegations, or would you
>> challenge that person to prove their claims? In fact, wouldn't you make
>> a formal complaint to the police, or at least begin slander proceedings?
>>
>> Ballmer is spreading false allegations about GNU/Linux supposedly
>> infringing Microsoft's "IP", and has point blank refused to provide any
>> evidence at all. IMHO this should be a crime in itself, and thugs like
>> Ballmer should be sent to prison, where he belongs.
>>
>> So I agree with "7" completely. No one should be allowed to make false
>> patent claims with complete impunity, and anyone who /does/ make such
>> claims should be /required/ by law to prove them, or face prosecution
>> themselves.
>>
>> Of course that does not necessarily mean that /everyone/ who holds
>> patents must dedicate themselves to identifying all infringers, much
>> less even /make/ infringement claims to begin with, but if they /do/
>> decide to aggressively enforce their so-called "Intellectual Property",
>> then they should be prepared to put their money where their mouth is, or
>> shut the Hell up. Period.
>>
>
>
> MS has been *very* careful, like SCO before them, to not make any claims
> of this nature in a legal venue.
>
> It's FUD, pure and simple, and every time they try it, they should be
> called on it. Put up, or shut up. Simple as that.
Quite recent:
"According to attendee at a recent Sydney Linux User Group meeting -
Microsoft Q&A of which Sarah Bond, Platform Strategy Manager Microsoft. Stated
that according to their legal people they cannot reveal which patents are
infringed upon because if they do and are they are found to be in breach, then
they can claim triple the compensation that they otherwise would be entitled
to.
Show us the Patent breaches MS or is it just more fud.
What a cop out.
Microbloat dont care about interoperability only their IP and the money
they can make from it. If they really wanted to work with the Open Source
community they would embrace existing licenses and not shove the permissable
license down every ones throats.
We dont need OOXML or Microsofts unstable platforms and development model.
If I were a company I would tell MS to go and jump regarding their IP. Im
not infringing upon their copyright so why should I be concerned."
http://weblog.infoworld.com/openresource/archives/2008/01/microsoft_to_re.html
--
~~ Best of wishes
Roy S. Schestowitz | Download Othello: http://othellomaster.com
http://Schestowitz.com | RHAT GNU/Linux | PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
run-level 2 2008-01-24 14:06 last=
http://iuron.com - help build a non-profit search engine
|
|
