Roy Schestowitz wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Storing text docs in XML may run afoul of Microsoft patent
>
> ,----[ Quote ]
> | At the same time that Microsoft was pushing for the adoption of an
> | XML-based file format for documents, it had a patent pending that would
> | cover most uses of XML for word processing files.
This is just unbelievable!
Every time micoshaft was beating up ISO staff members
and bribing stooges to go sit in committees,
behind it all, they were patenting the very documents they
were putting before ISO standards committees and its members
to vote on. They flatly refused to disclose to the
members they were actively patenting the standards
documents.
The utter stupid fscks.
I think there should be legal investigation from
governments to see if anything can be done
to make micoshaft and its stooges pay for the
damage they inflicted on respectable institutions.
> http://arstechnica.com/microsoft/news/2009/08
microsoft-granted-patent-on-xml-word-processing-files.ars
>
> Don't be fooled again
>
> ,----[ Quote ]
> | Glynn Moody writes an insightful analysis of Microsoft's latest attempt
> | to confuse the issue of open standards by throwing a new word into the
> | mix: balance. It didn't fool Glynn, and it shouldn't fool you, either.
> |
> | In the final analysis, the question of what is an open standard, and how
> | governments and free markets should police the claims of those who
> | purport to offer open standards should never come down to a question of
> | rhetoric. An open standard should never depend on what the definition of
> | "is" is. Rather, there is plenty of room for those who are honest to say
> | "X is a proprietary standard, dependent on restrictive technologies that
> | must be licensed for a fee" and for others who are equally honest when
> | they say "Y is an open standard, dependent on a variety of technologies,
> | all of which can be practiced royalty free". And if we believe that free
> | markets can make intelligent decisions based on fair information, market
> | participants can choose which offering is most attractive to them and
> | the best will come to all.
> `----
>
> http://www.opensource.org/node/458
>
> Chinese Microsoft Office Rival Launching on Web Soon
>
> ,----[ Quote ]
> | A Chinese company that offers a rival suite to Microsoft Office is
> | following industry trends by turning its software into a Web-based
> | service.
> |
> | Evermore Software, based in the eastern Chinese city of Wuxi, has for
> | years offered a software suite that looks very similar to Microsoft
> | Office but costs less. Now the company sees its rivals moving online,
> | and it is designing a Web version of its suite to compete with the likes
> | of Google Docs and Microsoft's upcoming Office Web apps.
> `----
>
> http://www.cio.com/article/499175
Chinese_Microsoft_Office_Rival_Launching_on_Web_Soon?taxonomyId=1461
>
>
> Related:
>
> Wigital: Interoperability - Open Source, Sun Java, Novell Linux and
> Microsoft
>
> ,----[ Quote ]
> | Microsoft patenst in these protocols will be made available on RAND
> | terms at very low royalty rates Covenant not to sue open source
> | developers for development and non-commercial distribution of
> | implementations of these Open Protocols.
> `----
>
> http://www.digitalmajority.org/forum/t-67212
wigital:interoperability-open-source-sun-java-novell-linux-and-microsoft
>
>
> 2008-04-02 Royalty Free versus Reasonable and Non Discriminatory Licensing
>
> ,----[ Quote ]
> | Now, here an example of a RAND (Reasonable And Non Discriminatory)
> | licensing model, this one has been made by Cisco about VRRP :
> |
> | Cisco is the owner of US patent No. 5 473 599, relating to the subject
> | matter of "Virtual Router Redundancy Protocol for IPv6
> | <draft-ietf-vrrp-ipv6-spec-04.txt>. If technology in this document is
> | included in a standard adopted by IETF and any claims of this or any
> | other Cisco patent are necessary for practicing the standard, any party
> | will be able to obtain a license from Cisco to use any such patent
> | claims under reasonable, non-discriminatory terms to implement and fully
> | comply with the standard.
> |
> | First you need to contact Cisco to have a license but the terms are
> | unknown. "Non-discriminatory" is vague and could be an issue for any
> | free software implementation.
> `----
>
> http://www.foo.be/cgi-bin
wiki.pl/2008-04-02_Royalty_Free_versus_Reasonable_and_Non_Discriminatory_Licensing
>
>
> Rambus Court: ?Price Raising Deception? Not Competitive Harm
>
> ,----[ Quote ]
> | By the time Rambus announced its patents and began demanding royalties
> | (and filing patent infringement suits against companies that refused to
> | pay royalties), Rambus had achieved a technical ?lock-in? that made it
> | difficult for the memory chip industry to move to a different
> | technology. Rambus?s lock-in allowed it to obtain a 90% market-share,
> | and demand supracompetitive royalties from companies that were producing
> | JEDEC-compliant memory devices. Rambus has earned several billion
> | dollars in licensing fees to date, and by some estimates its total
> | royalties are could reach as high as $11 billion.
> `----
>
> http://www.masslawblog.com/?p=179
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
>
> iEYEARECAAYFAkp/PdIACgkQU4xAY3RXLo4AowCgmoGzTlFPthurNUHDTqOMLyTg
> QHAAniRDId8aGh4Kc8t2kxa0Oig7lOAG
> =htrY
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
|
|
