Discussion:
#Microsoft claims Linux violates 235 patents
(too old to reply)
Billary/2008
2007-05-14 20:19:01 UTC
Permalink
http://www.rawstory.com/showoutarticle.php?src=http%3A%2F%2Fnews.com.com%2FReport%2BMicrosoft%2Bsays%2Bopen%2Bsource%2Bviolates%2B235%2Bpatents%2F2100-1014_3-6183437.html
Report: Microsoft says open source violates 235 patents
Top Microsoft lawyer alleges in a magazine interview that the Linux kernel
and OpenOffice.org violate hundreds of the company's patents.
By Ina Friedand Stephen Shankland
Staff Writer, CNET News.com
Published: May 13, 2007, 7:35 PM PDT
Last modified: May 13, 2007, 8:30 PM PDT
Tell us what you think about this storyTalkBackE-mail this story to a
friendE-mailView this story formatted for printingPrint Add to your
del.icio.usdel.icio.us Digg this storyDigg this
Report: Microsoft says open source violates 235 patents
update Microsoft claims that free and open-source software violates 235 of
its patents, according to a magazine report published Sunday.
In an interview with Fortune, Microsoft top lawyer Brad Smith alleges that
the Linux kernel violates 42 Microsoft patents, while its user interface
and other design elements infringe on a further 65. OpenOffice.org is
accused of infringing 45, along with 83 more in other free and open-source
programs, according to Fortune.
It is not entirely clear how Microsoft might proceed in enforcing these
patents, but the company has been encouraging large tech companies that
depend on Linux to ink patent deals, starting with its controversial pact
with Novell last November. Microsoft has also cited Linux protection
playing a role in recent patent swap deals with Samsung and Fuji Xerox.
Microsoft has also had discussions but not reached a deal with Red Hat, as
noted in the Fortune article.
Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer is also quoted in the article as saying
Microsoft's open-source competitors need to "play by the same rules as the
rest of the business."
"What's fair is fair," Ballmer told Fortune. "We live in a world where we
honor, and support the honoring of, intellectual property."
The story notes that some big tech proponents of open source have been
stockpiling intellectual property as part of the Open Invention Network,
set up in 2005 by folks like Sony, Red Hat, IBM, NEC and Philips. The
article surmises that if Microsoft were to go after open source, these
companies' combined know-how might give it some patent weapons to go after
Windows.
A Microsoft representative did not immediately respond to an e-mail
seeking comment.
Given how deeply entrenched open-source software has become in the
computing industry, taking direct legal action against the open-source
realm would be a complicated, hackle-raising undertaking for Microsoft.
Customers use open-source software widely, and many major computing
companies--IBM, Dell, Sun Microsystems, Hewlett-Packard, Motorola and
Oracle, for example--support Linux work directly.
It's not the first time that open-source patent concerns have arisen. A
2004 study by a Open Source Risk Management, a company selling insurance
against risks of using open-source software, concluded that Linux could
violate at least 283 patents, 27 of them Microsoft patents.
Patents and the open-source movement get along awkwardly at best. Patent
law gives proprietary, exclusive rights to patent holders, but open-source
programming is built on the idea of free sharing. Newer open-source
licenses sometimes address the issue by requiring contributors to
open-source projects to grant users and developers of the software a
perpetual, royalty-free license to any patents that relate to the
contribution.
Now on News.com
Report: Microsoft says open source violates 235 patents Most hated blogger
Online radio remixes the future of music
Different companies have dealt in different ways with the open-source
patent conundrum. For example, HP has taken a pro-patent stance, while
IBM, Nokia, Sun and others have granted some rights to use some of their
patents in open-source software.
The Open Invention Network remains a relatively young effort, but it has
attracted participation this year from proprietary software giant Oracle
and from Linux support seller Canonical. A company may license the
network's patents for free as long as they promise not to assert any
patent claims against those involved in the "Linux environment."
The Free Software Foundation is working on a new draft of the General
Public License, one element of which will ban partnerships such as the one
struck by Novell and Microsoft.
The Linux geeks love to bash MSFT. Yet they love to copy the features and
funtionality of MSFT products. They only wish they had a product half as
powerful and feature rich as MSFT has. The Linux geeks are nothing but a
bunch of thieves intent on destroying the rights of intellectual property
owners.
m***@gmail.com
2007-05-14 20:50:01 UTC
Permalink
On May 14, 4:19 pm, "Billary/2008" <F#
Post by Billary/2008
http://www.rawstory.com/showoutarticle.php?src=http%3A%2F%2Fnews.com....
Report: Microsoft says open source violates 235 patents
Top Microsoft lawyer alleges in a magazine interview that the Linux kernel
and OpenOffice.org violate hundreds of the company's patents.
By Ina Friedand Stephen Shankland
Staff Writer, CNET News.com
Published: May 13, 2007, 7:35 PM PDT
Last modified: May 13, 2007, 8:30 PM PDT
Tell us what you think about this storyTalkBackE-mail this story to a
friendE-mailView this story formatted for printingPrint Add to your
del.icio.usdel.icio.us Digg this storyDigg this
Report: Microsoft says open source violates 235 patents
update Microsoft claims that free and open-source software violates 235 of
its patents, according to a magazine report published Sunday.
In an interview with Fortune, Microsoft top lawyer Brad Smith alleges that
the Linux kernel violates 42 Microsoft patents, while its user interface
and other design elements infringe on a further 65. OpenOffice.org is
accused of infringing 45, along with 83 more in other free and open-source
programs, according to Fortune.
It is not entirely clear how Microsoft might proceed in enforcing these
patents, but the company has been encouraging large tech companies that
depend on Linux to ink patent deals, starting with its controversial pact
with Novell last November. Microsoft has also cited Linux protection
playing a role in recent patent swap deals with Samsung and Fuji Xerox.
Microsoft has also had discussions but not reached a deal with Red Hat, as
noted in the Fortune article.
Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer is also quoted in the article as saying
Microsoft's open-source competitors need to "play by the same rules as the
rest of the business."
"What's fair is fair," Ballmer told Fortune. "We live in a world where we
honor, and support the honoring of, intellectual property."
The story notes that some big tech proponents of open source have been
stockpiling intellectual property as part of the Open Invention Network,
set up in 2005 by folks like Sony, Red Hat, IBM, NEC and Philips. The
article surmises that if Microsoft were to go after open source, these
companies' combined know-how might give it some patent weapons to go after
Windows.
A Microsoft representative did not immediately respond to an e-mail
seeking comment.
Given how deeply entrenched open-source software has become in the
computing industry, taking direct legal action against the open-source
realm would be a complicated, hackle-raising undertaking for Microsoft.
Customers use open-source software widely, and many major computing
companies--IBM, Dell, Sun Microsystems, Hewlett-Packard, Motorola and
Oracle, for example--support Linux work directly.
It's not the first time that open-source patent concerns have arisen. A
2004 study by a Open Source Risk Management, a company selling insurance
against risks of using open-source software, concluded that Linux could
violate at least 283 patents, 27 of them Microsoft patents.
Patents and the open-source movement get along awkwardly at best. Patent
law gives proprietary, exclusive rights to patent holders, but open-source
programming is built on the idea of free sharing. Newer open-source
licenses sometimes address the issue by requiring contributors to
open-source projects to grant users and developers of the software a
perpetual, royalty-free license to any patents that relate to the
contribution.
Now on News.com
Report: Microsoft says open source violates 235 patents Most hated blogger
Online radio remixes the future of music
Different companies have dealt in different ways with the open-source
patent conundrum. For example, HP has taken a pro-patent stance, while
IBM, Nokia, Sun and others have granted some rights to use some of their
patents in open-source software.
The Open Invention Network remains a relatively young effort, but it has
attracted participation this year from proprietary software giant Oracle
and from Linux support seller Canonical. A company may license the
network's patents for free as long as they promise not to assert any
patent claims against those involved in the "Linux environment."
The Free Software Foundation is working on a new draft of the General
Public License, one element of which will ban partnerships such as the one
struck by Novell and Microsoft.
The Linux geeks love to bash MSFT. Yet they love to copy the features and
funtionality of MSFT products. They only wish they had a product half as
powerful and feature rich as MSFT has. The Linux geeks are nothing but a
bunch of thieves intent on destroying the rights of intellectual property
owners.
Um.... do you know where MS got its original OS's from?

Do you know where Internet Explorer came from?

Do you know why MS Word, STILL a functionally inferior product to
Wordperfect, is the most popular word processor in the world?

MS hasn't had an original idea during their entire existence, and
their marketing strategy revolves around predatory capitalism.

OpenOffice has been around since 2000, and they're just NOW claiming
that they're "stealing" code for basic functionality?

Good luck with that...
Billary/2008
2007-05-14 21:47:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by m***@gmail.com
On May 14, 4:19 pm, "Billary/2008" <F#
Post by Billary/2008
http://www.rawstory.com/showoutarticle.php?src=http%3A%2F%2Fnews.com....
Report: Microsoft says open source violates 235 patents
Top Microsoft lawyer alleges in a magazine interview that the Linux kernel
and OpenOffice.org violate hundreds of the company's patents.
By Ina Friedand Stephen Shankland
Staff Writer, CNET News.com
Published: May 13, 2007, 7:35 PM PDT
Last modified: May 13, 2007, 8:30 PM PDT
Tell us what you think about this storyTalkBackE-mail this story to a
friendE-mailView this story formatted for printingPrint Add to your
del.icio.usdel.icio.us Digg this storyDigg this
Report: Microsoft says open source violates 235 patents
update Microsoft claims that free and open-source software violates 235 of
its patents, according to a magazine report published Sunday.
In an interview with Fortune, Microsoft top lawyer Brad Smith alleges that
the Linux kernel violates 42 Microsoft patents, while its user interface
and other design elements infringe on a further 65. OpenOffice.org is
accused of infringing 45, along with 83 more in other free and open-source
programs, according to Fortune.
It is not entirely clear how Microsoft might proceed in enforcing these
patents, but the company has been encouraging large tech companies that
depend on Linux to ink patent deals, starting with its controversial pact
with Novell last November. Microsoft has also cited Linux protection
playing a role in recent patent swap deals with Samsung and Fuji Xerox.
Microsoft has also had discussions but not reached a deal with Red Hat, as
noted in the Fortune article.
Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer is also quoted in the article as saying
Microsoft's open-source competitors need to "play by the same rules as the
rest of the business."
"What's fair is fair," Ballmer told Fortune. "We live in a world where we
honor, and support the honoring of, intellectual property."
The story notes that some big tech proponents of open source have been
stockpiling intellectual property as part of the Open Invention Network,
set up in 2005 by folks like Sony, Red Hat, IBM, NEC and Philips. The
article surmises that if Microsoft were to go after open source, these
companies' combined know-how might give it some patent weapons to go after
Windows.
A Microsoft representative did not immediately respond to an e-mail
seeking comment.
Given how deeply entrenched open-source software has become in the
computing industry, taking direct legal action against the open-source
realm would be a complicated, hackle-raising undertaking for Microsoft.
Customers use open-source software widely, and many major computing
companies--IBM, Dell, Sun Microsystems, Hewlett-Packard, Motorola and
Oracle, for example--support Linux work directly.
It's not the first time that open-source patent concerns have arisen. A
2004 study by a Open Source Risk Management, a company selling insurance
against risks of using open-source software, concluded that Linux could
violate at least 283 patents, 27 of them Microsoft patents.
Patents and the open-source movement get along awkwardly at best. Patent
law gives proprietary, exclusive rights to patent holders, but open-source
programming is built on the idea of free sharing. Newer open-source
licenses sometimes address the issue by requiring contributors to
open-source projects to grant users and developers of the software a
perpetual, royalty-free license to any patents that relate to the
contribution.
Now on News.com
Report: Microsoft says open source violates 235 patents Most hated blogger
Online radio remixes the future of music
Different companies have dealt in different ways with the open-source
patent conundrum. For example, HP has taken a pro-patent stance, while
IBM, Nokia, Sun and others have granted some rights to use some of their
patents in open-source software.
The Open Invention Network remains a relatively young effort, but it has
attracted participation this year from proprietary software giant Oracle
and from Linux support seller Canonical. A company may license the
network's patents for free as long as they promise not to assert any
patent claims against those involved in the "Linux environment."
The Free Software Foundation is working on a new draft of the General
Public License, one element of which will ban partnerships such as the one
struck by Novell and Microsoft.
The Linux geeks love to bash MSFT. Yet they love to copy the features and
funtionality of MSFT products. They only wish they had a product half as
powerful and feature rich as MSFT has. The Linux geeks are nothing but a
bunch of thieves intent on destroying the rights of intellectual property
owners.
Um.... do you know where MS got its original OS's from?
Do you know where Internet Explorer came from?
Do you know why MS Word, STILL a functionally inferior product to
Wordperfect, is the most popular word processor in the world?
MS hasn't had an original idea during their entire existence, and
their marketing strategy revolves around predatory capitalism.
OpenOffice has been around since 2000, and they're just NOW claiming
that they're "stealing" code for basic functionality?
Good luck with that...
You really shouldn't lecture me about MSFT. I spent the whole decade of the
1990's working for MSFT in the sales & marketing division. I didn't live
Microsoft history, I made it. Get a reality check. Your facts are laughable
and dated.
Gandalf Grey
2007-05-14 21:49:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by Billary/2008
Post by m***@gmail.com
On May 14, 4:19 pm, "Billary/2008" <F#
Post by Billary/2008
http://www.rawstory.com/showoutarticle.php?src=http%3A%2F%2Fnews.com....
Report: Microsoft says open source violates 235 patents
Top Microsoft lawyer alleges in a magazine interview that the Linux kernel
and OpenOffice.org violate hundreds of the company's patents.
By Ina Friedand Stephen Shankland
Staff Writer, CNET News.com
Published: May 13, 2007, 7:35 PM PDT
Last modified: May 13, 2007, 8:30 PM PDT
Tell us what you think about this storyTalkBackE-mail this story to a
friendE-mailView this story formatted for printingPrint Add to your
del.icio.usdel.icio.us Digg this storyDigg this
Report: Microsoft says open source violates 235 patents
update Microsoft claims that free and open-source software violates 235 of
its patents, according to a magazine report published Sunday.
In an interview with Fortune, Microsoft top lawyer Brad Smith alleges that
the Linux kernel violates 42 Microsoft patents, while its user interface
and other design elements infringe on a further 65. OpenOffice.org is
accused of infringing 45, along with 83 more in other free and open-source
programs, according to Fortune.
It is not entirely clear how Microsoft might proceed in enforcing these
patents, but the company has been encouraging large tech companies that
depend on Linux to ink patent deals, starting with its controversial pact
with Novell last November. Microsoft has also cited Linux protection
playing a role in recent patent swap deals with Samsung and Fuji Xerox.
Microsoft has also had discussions but not reached a deal with Red Hat, as
noted in the Fortune article.
Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer is also quoted in the article as saying
Microsoft's open-source competitors need to "play by the same rules as the
rest of the business."
"What's fair is fair," Ballmer told Fortune. "We live in a world where we
honor, and support the honoring of, intellectual property."
The story notes that some big tech proponents of open source have been
stockpiling intellectual property as part of the Open Invention Network,
set up in 2005 by folks like Sony, Red Hat, IBM, NEC and Philips. The
article surmises that if Microsoft were to go after open source, these
companies' combined know-how might give it some patent weapons to go after
Windows.
A Microsoft representative did not immediately respond to an e-mail
seeking comment.
Given how deeply entrenched open-source software has become in the
computing industry, taking direct legal action against the open-source
realm would be a complicated, hackle-raising undertaking for Microsoft.
Customers use open-source software widely, and many major computing
companies--IBM, Dell, Sun Microsystems, Hewlett-Packard, Motorola and
Oracle, for example--support Linux work directly.
It's not the first time that open-source patent concerns have arisen. A
2004 study by a Open Source Risk Management, a company selling insurance
against risks of using open-source software, concluded that Linux could
violate at least 283 patents, 27 of them Microsoft patents.
Patents and the open-source movement get along awkwardly at best. Patent
law gives proprietary, exclusive rights to patent holders, but open-source
programming is built on the idea of free sharing. Newer open-source
licenses sometimes address the issue by requiring contributors to
open-source projects to grant users and developers of the software a
perpetual, royalty-free license to any patents that relate to the
contribution.
Now on News.com
Report: Microsoft says open source violates 235 patents Most hated blogger
Online radio remixes the future of music
Different companies have dealt in different ways with the open-source
patent conundrum. For example, HP has taken a pro-patent stance, while
IBM, Nokia, Sun and others have granted some rights to use some of their
patents in open-source software.
The Open Invention Network remains a relatively young effort, but it has
attracted participation this year from proprietary software giant Oracle
and from Linux support seller Canonical. A company may license the
network's patents for free as long as they promise not to assert any
patent claims against those involved in the "Linux environment."
The Free Software Foundation is working on a new draft of the General
Public License, one element of which will ban partnerships such as the one
struck by Novell and Microsoft.
The Linux geeks love to bash MSFT. Yet they love to copy the features and
funtionality of MSFT products. They only wish they had a product half as
powerful and feature rich as MSFT has. The Linux geeks are nothing but a
bunch of thieves intent on destroying the rights of intellectual property
owners.
Um.... do you know where MS got its original OS's from?
Do you know where Internet Explorer came from?
Do you know why MS Word, STILL a functionally inferior product to
Wordperfect, is the most popular word processor in the world?
MS hasn't had an original idea during their entire existence, and
their marketing strategy revolves around predatory capitalism.
OpenOffice has been around since 2000, and they're just NOW claiming
that they're "stealing" code for basic functionality?
Good luck with that...
You really shouldn't lecture me about MSFT. I spent the whole decade of
the 1990's working for MSFT in the sales & marketing division. I didn't
live Microsoft history, I made it. Get a reality check. Your facts are
laughable and dated.
What's really "laughable" here is your horribly swollen attempts at
grandiosity, Shill.
Billary/2008
2007-05-14 21:58:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by Gandalf Grey
Post by Billary/2008
Post by m***@gmail.com
On May 14, 4:19 pm, "Billary/2008" <F#
Post by Billary/2008
http://www.rawstory.com/showoutarticle.php?src=http%3A%2F%2Fnews.com....
Report: Microsoft says open source violates 235 patents
Top Microsoft lawyer alleges in a magazine interview that the Linux kernel
and OpenOffice.org violate hundreds of the company's patents.
By Ina Friedand Stephen Shankland
Staff Writer, CNET News.com
Published: May 13, 2007, 7:35 PM PDT
Last modified: May 13, 2007, 8:30 PM PDT
Tell us what you think about this storyTalkBackE-mail this story to a
friendE-mailView this story formatted for printingPrint Add to your
del.icio.usdel.icio.us Digg this storyDigg this
Report: Microsoft says open source violates 235 patents
update Microsoft claims that free and open-source software violates 235 of
its patents, according to a magazine report published Sunday.
In an interview with Fortune, Microsoft top lawyer Brad Smith alleges that
the Linux kernel violates 42 Microsoft patents, while its user interface
and other design elements infringe on a further 65. OpenOffice.org is
accused of infringing 45, along with 83 more in other free and open-source
programs, according to Fortune.
It is not entirely clear how Microsoft might proceed in enforcing these
patents, but the company has been encouraging large tech companies that
depend on Linux to ink patent deals, starting with its controversial pact
with Novell last November. Microsoft has also cited Linux protection
playing a role in recent patent swap deals with Samsung and Fuji Xerox.
Microsoft has also had discussions but not reached a deal with Red Hat, as
noted in the Fortune article.
Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer is also quoted in the article as saying
Microsoft's open-source competitors need to "play by the same rules as the
rest of the business."
"What's fair is fair," Ballmer told Fortune. "We live in a world where we
honor, and support the honoring of, intellectual property."
The story notes that some big tech proponents of open source have been
stockpiling intellectual property as part of the Open Invention Network,
set up in 2005 by folks like Sony, Red Hat, IBM, NEC and Philips. The
article surmises that if Microsoft were to go after open source, these
companies' combined know-how might give it some patent weapons to go after
Windows.
A Microsoft representative did not immediately respond to an e-mail
seeking comment.
Given how deeply entrenched open-source software has become in the
computing industry, taking direct legal action against the open-source
realm would be a complicated, hackle-raising undertaking for Microsoft.
Customers use open-source software widely, and many major computing
companies--IBM, Dell, Sun Microsystems, Hewlett-Packard, Motorola and
Oracle, for example--support Linux work directly.
It's not the first time that open-source patent concerns have arisen. A
2004 study by a Open Source Risk Management, a company selling insurance
against risks of using open-source software, concluded that Linux could
violate at least 283 patents, 27 of them Microsoft patents.
Patents and the open-source movement get along awkwardly at best. Patent
law gives proprietary, exclusive rights to patent holders, but open-source
programming is built on the idea of free sharing. Newer open-source
licenses sometimes address the issue by requiring contributors to
open-source projects to grant users and developers of the software a
perpetual, royalty-free license to any patents that relate to the
contribution.
Now on News.com
Report: Microsoft says open source violates 235 patents Most hated blogger
Online radio remixes the future of music
Different companies have dealt in different ways with the open-source
patent conundrum. For example, HP has taken a pro-patent stance, while
IBM, Nokia, Sun and others have granted some rights to use some of their
patents in open-source software.
The Open Invention Network remains a relatively young effort, but it has
attracted participation this year from proprietary software giant Oracle
and from Linux support seller Canonical. A company may license the
network's patents for free as long as they promise not to assert any
patent claims against those involved in the "Linux environment."
The Free Software Foundation is working on a new draft of the General
Public License, one element of which will ban partnerships such as the one
struck by Novell and Microsoft.
The Linux geeks love to bash MSFT. Yet they love to copy the features and
funtionality of MSFT products. They only wish they had a product half as
powerful and feature rich as MSFT has. The Linux geeks are nothing but a
bunch of thieves intent on destroying the rights of intellectual property
owners.
Um.... do you know where MS got its original OS's from?
Do you know where Internet Explorer came from?
Do you know why MS Word, STILL a functionally inferior product to
Wordperfect, is the most popular word processor in the world?
MS hasn't had an original idea during their entire existence, and
their marketing strategy revolves around predatory capitalism.
OpenOffice has been around since 2000, and they're just NOW claiming
that they're "stealing" code for basic functionality?
Good luck with that...
You really shouldn't lecture me about MSFT. I spent the whole decade of
the 1990's working for MSFT in the sales & marketing division. I didn't
live Microsoft history, I made it. Get a reality check. Your facts are
laughable and dated.
What's really "laughable" here is your horribly swollen attempts at
grandiosity, Shill.
Fucking interloper, fraud, charlatan, liar, shill. Go ahead, post the last
word here ===>>>
Gandalf Grey
2007-05-14 22:05:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by Billary/2008
Post by Gandalf Grey
Post by Billary/2008
Post by m***@gmail.com
On May 14, 4:19 pm, "Billary/2008" <F#
Post by Billary/2008
http://www.rawstory.com/showoutarticle.php?src=http%3A%2F%2Fnews.com....
Report: Microsoft says open source violates 235 patents
Top Microsoft lawyer alleges in a magazine interview that the Linux kernel
and OpenOffice.org violate hundreds of the company's patents.
By Ina Friedand Stephen Shankland
Staff Writer, CNET News.com
Published: May 13, 2007, 7:35 PM PDT
Last modified: May 13, 2007, 8:30 PM PDT
Tell us what you think about this storyTalkBackE-mail this story to a
friendE-mailView this story formatted for printingPrint Add to your
del.icio.usdel.icio.us Digg this storyDigg this
Report: Microsoft says open source violates 235 patents
update Microsoft claims that free and open-source software violates 235 of
its patents, according to a magazine report published Sunday.
In an interview with Fortune, Microsoft top lawyer Brad Smith alleges that
the Linux kernel violates 42 Microsoft patents, while its user interface
and other design elements infringe on a further 65. OpenOffice.org is
accused of infringing 45, along with 83 more in other free and open-source
programs, according to Fortune.
It is not entirely clear how Microsoft might proceed in enforcing these
patents, but the company has been encouraging large tech companies that
depend on Linux to ink patent deals, starting with its controversial pact
with Novell last November. Microsoft has also cited Linux protection
playing a role in recent patent swap deals with Samsung and Fuji Xerox.
Microsoft has also had discussions but not reached a deal with Red Hat, as
noted in the Fortune article.
Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer is also quoted in the article as saying
Microsoft's open-source competitors need to "play by the same rules as the
rest of the business."
"What's fair is fair," Ballmer told Fortune. "We live in a world where we
honor, and support the honoring of, intellectual property."
The story notes that some big tech proponents of open source have been
stockpiling intellectual property as part of the Open Invention Network,
set up in 2005 by folks like Sony, Red Hat, IBM, NEC and Philips. The
article surmises that if Microsoft were to go after open source, these
companies' combined know-how might give it some patent weapons to go after
Windows.
A Microsoft representative did not immediately respond to an e-mail
seeking comment.
Given how deeply entrenched open-source software has become in the
computing industry, taking direct legal action against the open-source
realm would be a complicated, hackle-raising undertaking for Microsoft.
Customers use open-source software widely, and many major computing
companies--IBM, Dell, Sun Microsystems, Hewlett-Packard, Motorola and
Oracle, for example--support Linux work directly.
It's not the first time that open-source patent concerns have arisen. A
2004 study by a Open Source Risk Management, a company selling insurance
against risks of using open-source software, concluded that Linux could
violate at least 283 patents, 27 of them Microsoft patents.
Patents and the open-source movement get along awkwardly at best. Patent
law gives proprietary, exclusive rights to patent holders, but open-source
programming is built on the idea of free sharing. Newer open-source
licenses sometimes address the issue by requiring contributors to
open-source projects to grant users and developers of the software a
perpetual, royalty-free license to any patents that relate to the
contribution.
Now on News.com
Report: Microsoft says open source violates 235 patents Most hated blogger
Online radio remixes the future of music
Different companies have dealt in different ways with the open-source
patent conundrum. For example, HP has taken a pro-patent stance, while
IBM, Nokia, Sun and others have granted some rights to use some of their
patents in open-source software.
The Open Invention Network remains a relatively young effort, but it has
attracted participation this year from proprietary software giant Oracle
and from Linux support seller Canonical. A company may license the
network's patents for free as long as they promise not to assert any
patent claims against those involved in the "Linux environment."
The Free Software Foundation is working on a new draft of the General
Public License, one element of which will ban partnerships such as the one
struck by Novell and Microsoft.
The Linux geeks love to bash MSFT. Yet they love to copy the features and
funtionality of MSFT products. They only wish they had a product half as
powerful and feature rich as MSFT has. The Linux geeks are nothing but a
bunch of thieves intent on destroying the rights of intellectual property
owners.
Um.... do you know where MS got its original OS's from?
Do you know where Internet Explorer came from?
Do you know why MS Word, STILL a functionally inferior product to
Wordperfect, is the most popular word processor in the world?
MS hasn't had an original idea during their entire existence, and
their marketing strategy revolves around predatory capitalism.
OpenOffice has been around since 2000, and they're just NOW claiming
that they're "stealing" code for basic functionality?
Good luck with that...
You really shouldn't lecture me about MSFT. I spent the whole decade of
the 1990's working for MSFT in the sales & marketing division. I didn't
live Microsoft history, I made it. Get a reality check. Your facts are
laughable and dated.
What's really "laughable" here is your horribly swollen attempts at
grandiosity, Shill.
Fucking interloper, fraud, charlatan, liar, shill.
Run out of your medicine, Shill?
Billary/2008
2007-05-14 22:07:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by Gandalf Grey
Post by Billary/2008
Post by Gandalf Grey
Post by Billary/2008
Post by m***@gmail.com
On May 14, 4:19 pm, "Billary/2008" <F#
Post by Billary/2008
http://www.rawstory.com/showoutarticle.php?src=http%3A%2F%2Fnews.com....
Report: Microsoft says open source violates 235 patents
Top Microsoft lawyer alleges in a magazine interview that the Linux kernel
and OpenOffice.org violate hundreds of the company's patents.
By Ina Friedand Stephen Shankland
Staff Writer, CNET News.com
Published: May 13, 2007, 7:35 PM PDT
Last modified: May 13, 2007, 8:30 PM PDT
Tell us what you think about this storyTalkBackE-mail this story to a
friendE-mailView this story formatted for printingPrint Add to your
del.icio.usdel.icio.us Digg this storyDigg this
Report: Microsoft says open source violates 235 patents
update Microsoft claims that free and open-source software violates 235 of
its patents, according to a magazine report published Sunday.
In an interview with Fortune, Microsoft top lawyer Brad Smith alleges that
the Linux kernel violates 42 Microsoft patents, while its user interface
and other design elements infringe on a further 65. OpenOffice.org is
accused of infringing 45, along with 83 more in other free and open-source
programs, according to Fortune.
It is not entirely clear how Microsoft might proceed in enforcing these
patents, but the company has been encouraging large tech companies that
depend on Linux to ink patent deals, starting with its
controversial pact
with Novell last November. Microsoft has also cited Linux protection
playing a role in recent patent swap deals with Samsung and Fuji Xerox.
Microsoft has also had discussions but not reached a deal with Red Hat, as
noted in the Fortune article.
Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer is also quoted in the article as saying
Microsoft's open-source competitors need to "play by the same rules as the
rest of the business."
"What's fair is fair," Ballmer told Fortune. "We live in a world where we
honor, and support the honoring of, intellectual property."
The story notes that some big tech proponents of open source have been
stockpiling intellectual property as part of the Open Invention Network,
set up in 2005 by folks like Sony, Red Hat, IBM, NEC and Philips. The
article surmises that if Microsoft were to go after open source, these
companies' combined know-how might give it some patent weapons to go after
Windows.
A Microsoft representative did not immediately respond to an e-mail
seeking comment.
Given how deeply entrenched open-source software has become in the
computing industry, taking direct legal action against the open-source
realm would be a complicated, hackle-raising undertaking for Microsoft.
Customers use open-source software widely, and many major computing
companies--IBM, Dell, Sun Microsystems, Hewlett-Packard, Motorola and
Oracle, for example--support Linux work directly.
It's not the first time that open-source patent concerns have arisen. A
2004 study by a Open Source Risk Management, a company selling insurance
against risks of using open-source software, concluded that Linux could
violate at least 283 patents, 27 of them Microsoft patents.
Patents and the open-source movement get along awkwardly at best. Patent
law gives proprietary, exclusive rights to patent holders, but open-source
programming is built on the idea of free sharing. Newer open-source
licenses sometimes address the issue by requiring contributors to
open-source projects to grant users and developers of the software a
perpetual, royalty-free license to any patents that relate to the
contribution.
Now on News.com
Report: Microsoft says open source violates 235 patents Most hated blogger
Online radio remixes the future of music
Different companies have dealt in different ways with the open-source
patent conundrum. For example, HP has taken a pro-patent stance, while
IBM, Nokia, Sun and others have granted some rights to use some of their
patents in open-source software.
The Open Invention Network remains a relatively young effort, but it has
attracted participation this year from proprietary software giant Oracle
and from Linux support seller Canonical. A company may license the
network's patents for free as long as they promise not to assert any
patent claims against those involved in the "Linux environment."
The Free Software Foundation is working on a new draft of the General
Public License, one element of which will ban partnerships such as the one
struck by Novell and Microsoft.
The Linux geeks love to bash MSFT. Yet they love to copy the features and
funtionality of MSFT products. They only wish they had a product half as
powerful and feature rich as MSFT has. The Linux geeks are nothing but a
bunch of thieves intent on destroying the rights of intellectual property
owners.
Um.... do you know where MS got its original OS's from?
Do you know where Internet Explorer came from?
Do you know why MS Word, STILL a functionally inferior product to
Wordperfect, is the most popular word processor in the world?
MS hasn't had an original idea during their entire existence, and
their marketing strategy revolves around predatory capitalism.
OpenOffice has been around since 2000, and they're just NOW claiming
that they're "stealing" code for basic functionality?
Good luck with that...
You really shouldn't lecture me about MSFT. I spent the whole decade
of the 1990's working for MSFT in the sales & marketing division. I
didn't live Microsoft history, I made it. Get a reality check. Your
facts are laughable and dated.
What's really "laughable" here is your horribly swollen attempts at
grandiosity, Shill.
Fucking interloper, fraud, charlatan, liar, shill.
Run out of your medicine, Shill?
Your blood sugar looks to be low shill. Take your shot, I'm paying for it.
You might as well enjoy it. Just don't forget to say thank you once in a
while.
Gandalf Grey
2007-05-14 22:18:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by Billary/2008
Post by Gandalf Grey
Post by Billary/2008
Post by Gandalf Grey
Post by Billary/2008
Post by m***@gmail.com
On May 14, 4:19 pm, "Billary/2008" <F#
Post by Billary/2008
http://www.rawstory.com/showoutarticle.php?src=http%3A%2F%2Fnews.com....
Report: Microsoft says open source violates 235 patents
Top Microsoft lawyer alleges in a magazine interview that the Linux kernel
and OpenOffice.org violate hundreds of the company's patents.
By Ina Friedand Stephen Shankland
Staff Writer, CNET News.com
Published: May 13, 2007, 7:35 PM PDT
Last modified: May 13, 2007, 8:30 PM PDT
Tell us what you think about this storyTalkBackE-mail this story to a
friendE-mailView this story formatted for printingPrint Add to your
del.icio.usdel.icio.us Digg this storyDigg this
Report: Microsoft says open source violates 235 patents
update Microsoft claims that free and open-source software violates 235 of
its patents, according to a magazine report published Sunday.
In an interview with Fortune, Microsoft top lawyer Brad Smith alleges that
the Linux kernel violates 42 Microsoft patents, while its user interface
and other design elements infringe on a further 65. OpenOffice.org is
accused of infringing 45, along with 83 more in other free and open-source
programs, according to Fortune.
It is not entirely clear how Microsoft might proceed in enforcing these
patents, but the company has been encouraging large tech companies that
depend on Linux to ink patent deals, starting with its
controversial pact
with Novell last November. Microsoft has also cited Linux protection
playing a role in recent patent swap deals with Samsung and Fuji Xerox.
Microsoft has also had discussions but not reached a deal with Red Hat, as
noted in the Fortune article.
Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer is also quoted in the article as saying
Microsoft's open-source competitors need to "play by the same rules as the
rest of the business."
"What's fair is fair," Ballmer told Fortune. "We live in a world where we
honor, and support the honoring of, intellectual property."
The story notes that some big tech proponents of open source have been
stockpiling intellectual property as part of the Open Invention Network,
set up in 2005 by folks like Sony, Red Hat, IBM, NEC and Philips. The
article surmises that if Microsoft were to go after open source, these
companies' combined know-how might give it some patent weapons to go after
Windows.
A Microsoft representative did not immediately respond to an e-mail
seeking comment.
Given how deeply entrenched open-source software has become in the
computing industry, taking direct legal action against the open-source
realm would be a complicated, hackle-raising undertaking for Microsoft.
Customers use open-source software widely, and many major computing
companies--IBM, Dell, Sun Microsystems, Hewlett-Packard, Motorola and
Oracle, for example--support Linux work directly.
It's not the first time that open-source patent concerns have arisen. A
2004 study by a Open Source Risk Management, a company selling insurance
against risks of using open-source software, concluded that Linux could
violate at least 283 patents, 27 of them Microsoft patents.
Patents and the open-source movement get along awkwardly at best. Patent
law gives proprietary, exclusive rights to patent holders, but open-source
programming is built on the idea of free sharing. Newer open-source
licenses sometimes address the issue by requiring contributors to
open-source projects to grant users and developers of the software a
perpetual, royalty-free license to any patents that relate to the
contribution.
Now on News.com
Report: Microsoft says open source violates 235 patents Most hated blogger
Online radio remixes the future of music
Different companies have dealt in different ways with the open-source
patent conundrum. For example, HP has taken a pro-patent stance, while
IBM, Nokia, Sun and others have granted some rights to use some of their
patents in open-source software.
The Open Invention Network remains a relatively young effort, but it has
attracted participation this year from proprietary software giant Oracle
and from Linux support seller Canonical. A company may license the
network's patents for free as long as they promise not to assert any
patent claims against those involved in the "Linux environment."
The Free Software Foundation is working on a new draft of the General
Public License, one element of which will ban partnerships such as the one
struck by Novell and Microsoft.
The Linux geeks love to bash MSFT. Yet they love to copy the features and
funtionality of MSFT products. They only wish they had a product half as
powerful and feature rich as MSFT has. The Linux geeks are nothing but a
bunch of thieves intent on destroying the rights of intellectual property
owners.
Um.... do you know where MS got its original OS's from?
Do you know where Internet Explorer came from?
Do you know why MS Word, STILL a functionally inferior product to
Wordperfect, is the most popular word processor in the world?
MS hasn't had an original idea during their entire existence, and
their marketing strategy revolves around predatory capitalism.
OpenOffice has been around since 2000, and they're just NOW claiming
that they're "stealing" code for basic functionality?
Good luck with that...
You really shouldn't lecture me about MSFT. I spent the whole decade
of the 1990's working for MSFT in the sales & marketing division. I
didn't live Microsoft history, I made it. Get a reality check. Your
facts are laughable and dated.
What's really "laughable" here is your horribly swollen attempts at
grandiosity, Shill.
Fucking interloper, fraud, charlatan, liar, shill.
Run out of your medicine, Shill?
Your blood sugar looks to be low
And yet YOU are the one who's doing a Tourette's dance for us.

Do you ever see just how transparent you really are?
Billary/2008
2007-05-15 11:18:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by Gandalf Grey
Post by Billary/2008
Post by Gandalf Grey
Post by Billary/2008
Post by Gandalf Grey
Post by Billary/2008
Post by m***@gmail.com
On May 14, 4:19 pm, "Billary/2008" <F#
Post by Billary/2008
http://www.rawstory.com/showoutarticle.php?src=http%3A%2F%2Fnews.com....
Report: Microsoft says open source violates 235 patents
Top Microsoft lawyer alleges in a magazine interview that the
Linux kernel
and OpenOffice.org violate hundreds of the company's patents.
By Ina Friedand Stephen Shankland
Staff Writer, CNET News.com
Published: May 13, 2007, 7:35 PM PDT
Last modified: May 13, 2007, 8:30 PM PDT
Tell us what you think about this storyTalkBackE-mail this story to a
friendE-mailView this story formatted for printingPrint Add to your
del.icio.usdel.icio.us Digg this storyDigg this
Report: Microsoft says open source violates 235 patents
update Microsoft claims that free and open-source software
violates 235 of
its patents, according to a magazine report published Sunday.
In an interview with Fortune, Microsoft top lawyer Brad Smith
alleges that
the Linux kernel violates 42 Microsoft patents, while its user interface
and other design elements infringe on a further 65.
OpenOffice.org is
accused of infringing 45, along with 83 more in other free and
open-source
programs, according to Fortune.
It is not entirely clear how Microsoft might proceed in enforcing these
patents, but the company has been encouraging large tech companies that
depend on Linux to ink patent deals, starting with its controversial pact
with Novell last November. Microsoft has also cited Linux protection
playing a role in recent patent swap deals with Samsung and Fuji Xerox.
Microsoft has also had discussions but not reached a deal with
Red Hat, as
noted in the Fortune article.
Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer is also quoted in the article as saying
Microsoft's open-source competitors need to "play by the same
rules as the
rest of the business."
"What's fair is fair," Ballmer told Fortune. "We live in a world where we
honor, and support the honoring of, intellectual property."
The story notes that some big tech proponents of open source have been
stockpiling intellectual property as part of the Open Invention Network,
set up in 2005 by folks like Sony, Red Hat, IBM, NEC and Philips. The
article surmises that if Microsoft were to go after open source, these
companies' combined know-how might give it some patent weapons to
go after
Windows.
A Microsoft representative did not immediately respond to an e-mail
seeking comment.
Given how deeply entrenched open-source software has become in the
computing industry, taking direct legal action against the open-source
realm would be a complicated, hackle-raising undertaking for Microsoft.
Customers use open-source software widely, and many major computing
companies--IBM, Dell, Sun Microsystems, Hewlett-Packard, Motorola and
Oracle, for example--support Linux work directly.
It's not the first time that open-source patent concerns have arisen. A
2004 study by a Open Source Risk Management, a company selling insurance
against risks of using open-source software, concluded that Linux could
violate at least 283 patents, 27 of them Microsoft patents.
Patents and the open-source movement get along awkwardly at best. Patent
law gives proprietary, exclusive rights to patent holders, but
open-source
programming is built on the idea of free sharing. Newer open-source
licenses sometimes address the issue by requiring contributors to
open-source projects to grant users and developers of the software a
perpetual, royalty-free license to any patents that relate to the
contribution.
Now on News.com
Report: Microsoft says open source violates 235 patents Most
hated blogger
Online radio remixes the future of music
Different companies have dealt in different ways with the open-source
patent conundrum. For example, HP has taken a pro-patent stance, while
IBM, Nokia, Sun and others have granted some rights to use some of their
patents in open-source software.
The Open Invention Network remains a relatively young effort, but it has
attracted participation this year from proprietary software giant Oracle
and from Linux support seller Canonical. A company may license the
network's patents for free as long as they promise not to assert any
patent claims against those involved in the "Linux environment."
The Free Software Foundation is working on a new draft of the General
Public License, one element of which will ban partnerships such
as the one
struck by Novell and Microsoft.
The Linux geeks love to bash MSFT. Yet they love to copy the features and
funtionality of MSFT products. They only wish they had a product half as
powerful and feature rich as MSFT has. The Linux geeks are nothing but a
bunch of thieves intent on destroying the rights of intellectual property
owners.
Um.... do you know where MS got its original OS's from?
Do you know where Internet Explorer came from?
Do you know why MS Word, STILL a functionally inferior product to
Wordperfect, is the most popular word processor in the world?
MS hasn't had an original idea during their entire existence, and
their marketing strategy revolves around predatory capitalism.
OpenOffice has been around since 2000, and they're just NOW claiming
that they're "stealing" code for basic functionality?
Good luck with that...
You really shouldn't lecture me about MSFT. I spent the whole decade
of the 1990's working for MSFT in the sales & marketing division. I
didn't live Microsoft history, I made it. Get a reality check. Your
facts are laughable and dated.
What's really "laughable" here is your horribly swollen attempts at
grandiosity, Shill.
Fucking interloper, fraud, charlatan, liar, shill.
Run out of your medicine, Shill?
Your blood sugar looks to be low
And yet YOU are the one who's doing a Tourette's dance for us.
Do you ever see just how transparent you really are?
You fucking fraud, charlatan, liar, shill.
Gandalf Grey
2007-05-15 17:05:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by Billary/2008
Post by Gandalf Grey
Post by Billary/2008
Post by Gandalf Grey
Post by Billary/2008
Post by Gandalf Grey
Post by Billary/2008
Post by m***@gmail.com
On May 14, 4:19 pm, "Billary/2008" <F#
Post by Billary/2008
http://www.rawstory.com/showoutarticle.php?src=http%3A%2F%2Fnews.com....
Report: Microsoft says open source violates 235 patents
Top Microsoft lawyer alleges in a magazine interview that the
Linux kernel
and OpenOffice.org violate hundreds of the company's patents.
By Ina Friedand Stephen Shankland
Staff Writer, CNET News.com
Published: May 13, 2007, 7:35 PM PDT
Last modified: May 13, 2007, 8:30 PM PDT
Tell us what you think about this storyTalkBackE-mail this story to a
friendE-mailView this story formatted for printingPrint Add to your
del.icio.usdel.icio.us Digg this storyDigg this
Report: Microsoft says open source violates 235 patents
update Microsoft claims that free and open-source software
violates 235 of
its patents, according to a magazine report published Sunday.
In an interview with Fortune, Microsoft top lawyer Brad Smith
alleges that
the Linux kernel violates 42 Microsoft patents, while its user
interface
and other design elements infringe on a further 65.
OpenOffice.org is
accused of infringing 45, along with 83 more in other free and
open-source
programs, according to Fortune.
It is not entirely clear how Microsoft might proceed in enforcing these
patents, but the company has been encouraging large tech companies that
depend on Linux to ink patent deals, starting with its
controversial pact
with Novell last November. Microsoft has also cited Linux protection
playing a role in recent patent swap deals with Samsung and Fuji Xerox.
Microsoft has also had discussions but not reached a deal with
Red Hat, as
noted in the Fortune article.
Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer is also quoted in the article as saying
Microsoft's open-source competitors need to "play by the same
rules as the
rest of the business."
"What's fair is fair," Ballmer told Fortune. "We live in a world
where we
honor, and support the honoring of, intellectual property."
The story notes that some big tech proponents of open source have been
stockpiling intellectual property as part of the Open Invention
Network,
set up in 2005 by folks like Sony, Red Hat, IBM, NEC and Philips. The
article surmises that if Microsoft were to go after open source, these
companies' combined know-how might give it some patent weapons
to go after
Windows.
A Microsoft representative did not immediately respond to an e-mail
seeking comment.
Given how deeply entrenched open-source software has become in the
computing industry, taking direct legal action against the open-source
realm would be a complicated, hackle-raising undertaking for Microsoft.
Customers use open-source software widely, and many major computing
companies--IBM, Dell, Sun Microsystems, Hewlett-Packard, Motorola and
Oracle, for example--support Linux work directly.
It's not the first time that open-source patent concerns have arisen. A
2004 study by a Open Source Risk Management, a company selling
insurance
against risks of using open-source software, concluded that Linux could
violate at least 283 patents, 27 of them Microsoft patents.
Patents and the open-source movement get along awkwardly at
best. Patent
law gives proprietary, exclusive rights to patent holders, but
open-source
programming is built on the idea of free sharing. Newer open-source
licenses sometimes address the issue by requiring contributors to
open-source projects to grant users and developers of the software a
perpetual, royalty-free license to any patents that relate to the
contribution.
Now on News.com
Report: Microsoft says open source violates 235 patents Most
hated blogger
Online radio remixes the future of music
Different companies have dealt in different ways with the open-source
patent conundrum. For example, HP has taken a pro-patent stance, while
IBM, Nokia, Sun and others have granted some rights to use some
of their
patents in open-source software.
The Open Invention Network remains a relatively young effort,
but it has
attracted participation this year from proprietary software
giant Oracle
and from Linux support seller Canonical. A company may license the
network's patents for free as long as they promise not to assert any
patent claims against those involved in the "Linux environment."
The Free Software Foundation is working on a new draft of the General
Public License, one element of which will ban partnerships such
as the one
struck by Novell and Microsoft.
The Linux geeks love to bash MSFT. Yet they love to copy the features and
funtionality of MSFT products. They only wish they had a product half as
powerful and feature rich as MSFT has. The Linux geeks are nothing but a
bunch of thieves intent on destroying the rights of intellectual property
owners.
Um.... do you know where MS got its original OS's from?
Do you know where Internet Explorer came from?
Do you know why MS Word, STILL a functionally inferior product to
Wordperfect, is the most popular word processor in the world?
MS hasn't had an original idea during their entire existence, and
their marketing strategy revolves around predatory capitalism.
OpenOffice has been around since 2000, and they're just NOW claiming
that they're "stealing" code for basic functionality?
Good luck with that...
You really shouldn't lecture me about MSFT. I spent the whole
decade of the 1990's working for MSFT in the sales & marketing
division. I didn't live Microsoft history, I made it. Get a
reality check. Your facts are laughable and dated.
What's really "laughable" here is your horribly swollen attempts at
grandiosity, Shill.
Fucking interloper, fraud, charlatan, liar, shill.
Run out of your medicine, Shill?
Your blood sugar looks to be low
And yet YOU are the one who's doing a Tourette's dance for us.
Do you ever see just how transparent you really are?
You fucking fraud, charlatan, liar, shill.
Tourette's is a terrible disease.
What Me Worry?
2007-05-15 21:25:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by Billary/2008
Post by Gandalf Grey
Post by Billary/2008
Post by Gandalf Grey
Post by Billary/2008
Post by Gandalf Grey
Post by Billary/2008
Post by m***@gmail.com
On May 14, 4:19 pm, "Billary/2008" <F#
Post by Billary/2008
http://www.rawstory.com/showoutarticle.php?src=http%3A%2F%2Fnews.com....
Report: Microsoft says open source violates 235 patents
Top Microsoft lawyer alleges in a magazine interview that the
Linux kernel
and OpenOffice.org violate hundreds of the company's patents.
By Ina Friedand Stephen Shankland
Staff Writer, CNET News.com
Published: May 13, 2007, 7:35 PM PDT
Last modified: May 13, 2007, 8:30 PM PDT
Tell us what you think about this storyTalkBackE-mail this story to a
friendE-mailView this story formatted for printingPrint Add to your
del.icio.usdel.icio.us Digg this storyDigg this
Report: Microsoft says open source violates 235 patents
update Microsoft claims that free and open-source software
violates 235 of
its patents, according to a magazine report published Sunday.
In an interview with Fortune, Microsoft top lawyer Brad Smith
alleges that
the Linux kernel violates 42 Microsoft patents, while its user
interface
and other design elements infringe on a further 65.
OpenOffice.org is
accused of infringing 45, along with 83 more in other free and
open-source
programs, according to Fortune.
It is not entirely clear how Microsoft might proceed in enforcing these
patents, but the company has been encouraging large tech companies that
depend on Linux to ink patent deals, starting with its
controversial pact
with Novell last November. Microsoft has also cited Linux protection
playing a role in recent patent swap deals with Samsung and Fuji Xerox.
Microsoft has also had discussions but not reached a deal with
Red Hat, as
noted in the Fortune article.
Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer is also quoted in the article as saying
Microsoft's open-source competitors need to "play by the same
rules as the
rest of the business."
"What's fair is fair," Ballmer told Fortune. "We live in a world
where we
honor, and support the honoring of, intellectual property."
The story notes that some big tech proponents of open source have been
stockpiling intellectual property as part of the Open Invention
Network,
set up in 2005 by folks like Sony, Red Hat, IBM, NEC and Philips. The
article surmises that if Microsoft were to go after open source, these
companies' combined know-how might give it some patent weapons
to go after
Windows.
A Microsoft representative did not immediately respond to an e-mail
seeking comment.
Given how deeply entrenched open-source software has become in the
computing industry, taking direct legal action against the open-source
realm would be a complicated, hackle-raising undertaking for Microsoft.
Customers use open-source software widely, and many major computing
companies--IBM, Dell, Sun Microsystems, Hewlett-Packard, Motorola and
Oracle, for example--support Linux work directly.
It's not the first time that open-source patent concerns have arisen. A
2004 study by a Open Source Risk Management, a company selling
insurance
against risks of using open-source software, concluded that Linux could
violate at least 283 patents, 27 of them Microsoft patents.
Patents and the open-source movement get along awkwardly at
best. Patent
law gives proprietary, exclusive rights to patent holders, but
open-source
programming is built on the idea of free sharing. Newer open-source
licenses sometimes address the issue by requiring contributors to
open-source projects to grant users and developers of the software a
perpetual, royalty-free license to any patents that relate to the
contribution.
Now on News.com
Report: Microsoft says open source violates 235 patents Most
hated blogger
Online radio remixes the future of music
Different companies have dealt in different ways with the open-source
patent conundrum. For example, HP has taken a pro-patent stance, while
IBM, Nokia, Sun and others have granted some rights to use some
of their
patents in open-source software.
The Open Invention Network remains a relatively young effort,
but it has
attracted participation this year from proprietary software
giant Oracle
and from Linux support seller Canonical. A company may license the
network's patents for free as long as they promise not to assert any
patent claims against those involved in the "Linux environment."
The Free Software Foundation is working on a new draft of the General
Public License, one element of which will ban partnerships such
as the one
struck by Novell and Microsoft.
The Linux geeks love to bash MSFT. Yet they love to copy the features and
funtionality of MSFT products. They only wish they had a product half as
powerful and feature rich as MSFT has. The Linux geeks are nothing but a
bunch of thieves intent on destroying the rights of intellectual property
owners.
Um.... do you know where MS got its original OS's from?
Do you know where Internet Explorer came from?
Do you know why MS Word, STILL a functionally inferior product to
Wordperfect, is the most popular word processor in the world?
MS hasn't had an original idea during their entire existence, and
their marketing strategy revolves around predatory capitalism.
OpenOffice has been around since 2000, and they're just NOW claiming
that they're "stealing" code for basic functionality?
Good luck with that...
You really shouldn't lecture me about MSFT. I spent the whole
decade of the 1990's working for MSFT in the sales & marketing
division. I didn't live Microsoft history, I made it. Get a
reality check. Your facts are laughable and dated.
What's really "laughable" here is your horribly swollen attempts at
grandiosity, Shill.
Fucking interloper, fraud, charlatan, liar, shill.
Run out of your medicine, Shill?
Your blood sugar looks to be low
And yet YOU are the one who's doing a Tourette's dance for us.
Do you ever see just how transparent you really are?
You fucking fraud, charlatan, liar, shill.
You really should see a specialist about your Tourette's.
m***@gmail.com
2007-05-15 01:55:03 UTC
Permalink
On May 14, 5:47 pm, "Billary/2008" <F#
Post by Billary/2008
Post by m***@gmail.com
On May 14, 4:19 pm, "Billary/2008" <F#
Post by Billary/2008
http://www.rawstory.com/showoutarticle.php?src=http%3A%2F%2Fnews.com....
Report: Microsoft says open source violates 235 patents
Top Microsoft lawyer alleges in a magazine interview that the Linux kernel
and OpenOffice.org violate hundreds of the company's patents.
By Ina Friedand Stephen Shankland
Staff Writer, CNET News.com
Published: May 13, 2007, 7:35 PM PDT
Last modified: May 13, 2007, 8:30 PM PDT
Tell us what you think about this storyTalkBackE-mail this story to a
friendE-mailView this story formatted for printingPrint Add to your
del.icio.usdel.icio.us Digg this storyDigg this
Report: Microsoft says open source violates 235 patents
update Microsoft claims that free and open-source software violates 235 of
its patents, according to a magazine report published Sunday.
In an interview with Fortune, Microsoft top lawyer Brad Smith alleges that
the Linux kernel violates 42 Microsoft patents, while its user interface
and other design elements infringe on a further 65. OpenOffice.org is
accused of infringing 45, along with 83 more in other free and open-source
programs, according to Fortune.
It is not entirely clear how Microsoft might proceed in enforcing these
patents, but the company has been encouraging large tech companies that
depend on Linux to ink patent deals, starting with its controversial pact
with Novell last November. Microsoft has also cited Linux protection
playing a role in recent patent swap deals with Samsung and Fuji Xerox.
Microsoft has also had discussions but not reached a deal with Red Hat, as
noted in the Fortune article.
Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer is also quoted in the article as saying
Microsoft's open-source competitors need to "play by the same rules as the
rest of the business."
"What's fair is fair," Ballmer told Fortune. "We live in a world where we
honor, and support the honoring of, intellectual property."
The story notes that some big tech proponents of open source have been
stockpiling intellectual property as part of the Open Invention Network,
set up in 2005 by folks like Sony, Red Hat, IBM, NEC and Philips. The
article surmises that if Microsoft were to go after open source, these
companies' combined know-how might give it some patent weapons to go after
Windows.
A Microsoft representative did not immediately respond to an e-mail
seeking comment.
Given how deeply entrenched open-source software has become in the
computing industry, taking direct legal action against the open-source
realm would be a complicated, hackle-raising undertaking for Microsoft.
Customers use open-source software widely, and many major computing
companies--IBM, Dell, Sun Microsystems, Hewlett-Packard, Motorola and
Oracle, for example--support Linux work directly.
It's not the first time that open-source patent concerns have arisen. A
2004 study by a Open Source Risk Management, a company selling insurance
against risks of using open-source software, concluded that Linux could
violate at least 283 patents, 27 of them Microsoft patents.
Patents and the open-source movement get along awkwardly at best. Patent
law gives proprietary, exclusive rights to patent holders, but open-source
programming is built on the idea of free sharing. Newer open-source
licenses sometimes address the issue by requiring contributors to
open-source projects to grant users and developers of the software a
perpetual, royalty-free license to any patents that relate to the
contribution.
Now on News.com
Report: Microsoft says open source violates 235 patents Most hated blogger
Online radio remixes the future of music
Different companies have dealt in different ways with the open-source
patent conundrum. For example, HP has taken a pro-patent stance, while
IBM, Nokia, Sun and others have granted some rights to use some of their
patents in open-source software.
The Open Invention Network remains a relatively young effort, but it has
attracted participation this year from proprietary software giant Oracle
and from Linux support seller Canonical. A company may license the
network's patents for free as long as they promise not to assert any
patent claims against those involved in the "Linux environment."
The Free Software Foundation is working on a new draft of the General
Public License, one element of which will ban partnerships such as the one
struck by Novell and Microsoft.
The Linux geeks love to bash MSFT. Yet they love to copy the features and
funtionality of MSFT products. They only wish they had a product half as
powerful and feature rich as MSFT has. The Linux geeks are nothing but a
bunch of thieves intent on destroying the rights of intellectual property
owners.
Um.... do you know where MS got its original OS's from?
Do you know where Internet Explorer came from?
Do you know why MS Word, STILL a functionally inferior product to
Wordperfect, is the most popular word processor in the world?
MS hasn't had an original idea during their entire existence, and
their marketing strategy revolves around predatory capitalism.
OpenOffice has been around since 2000, and they're just NOW claiming
that they're "stealing" code for basic functionality?
Good luck with that...
You really shouldn't lecture me about MSFT. I spent the whole decade of the
1990's working for MSFT in the sales & marketing division. I didn't live
Microsoft history, I made it. Get a reality check. Your facts are laughable
and dated.
So is Microsoft's claim.
Billary/2008
2007-05-15 11:47:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by m***@gmail.com
On May 14, 5:47 pm, "Billary/2008" <F#
Post by Billary/2008
Post by m***@gmail.com
On May 14, 4:19 pm, "Billary/2008" <F#
Post by Billary/2008
http://www.rawstory.com/showoutarticle.php?src=http%3A%2F%2Fnews.com....
Report: Microsoft says open source violates 235 patents
Top Microsoft lawyer alleges in a magazine interview that the Linux kernel
and OpenOffice.org violate hundreds of the company's patents.
By Ina Friedand Stephen Shankland
Staff Writer, CNET News.com
Published: May 13, 2007, 7:35 PM PDT
Last modified: May 13, 2007, 8:30 PM PDT
Tell us what you think about this storyTalkBackE-mail this story to a
friendE-mailView this story formatted for printingPrint Add to your
del.icio.usdel.icio.us Digg this storyDigg this
Report: Microsoft says open source violates 235 patents
update Microsoft claims that free and open-source software violates
235
of
its patents, according to a magazine report published Sunday.
In an interview with Fortune, Microsoft top lawyer Brad Smith
alleges
that
the Linux kernel violates 42 Microsoft patents, while its user interface
and other design elements infringe on a further 65. OpenOffice.org is
accused of infringing 45, along with 83 more in other free and open-source
programs, according to Fortune.
It is not entirely clear how Microsoft might proceed in enforcing these
patents, but the company has been encouraging large tech companies that
depend on Linux to ink patent deals, starting with its controversial pact
with Novell last November. Microsoft has also cited Linux protection
playing a role in recent patent swap deals with Samsung and Fuji Xerox.
Microsoft has also had discussions but not reached a deal with Red
Hat,
as
noted in the Fortune article.
Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer is also quoted in the article as saying
Microsoft's open-source competitors need to "play by the same rules
as
the
rest of the business."
"What's fair is fair," Ballmer told Fortune. "We live in a world
where
we
honor, and support the honoring of, intellectual property."
The story notes that some big tech proponents of open source have been
stockpiling intellectual property as part of the Open Invention Network,
set up in 2005 by folks like Sony, Red Hat, IBM, NEC and Philips. The
article surmises that if Microsoft were to go after open source, these
companies' combined know-how might give it some patent weapons to go after
Windows.
A Microsoft representative did not immediately respond to an e-mail
seeking comment.
Given how deeply entrenched open-source software has become in the
computing industry, taking direct legal action against the open-source
realm would be a complicated, hackle-raising undertaking for Microsoft.
Customers use open-source software widely, and many major computing
companies--IBM, Dell, Sun Microsystems, Hewlett-Packard, Motorola and
Oracle, for example--support Linux work directly.
It's not the first time that open-source patent concerns have arisen. A
2004 study by a Open Source Risk Management, a company selling insurance
against risks of using open-source software, concluded that Linux could
violate at least 283 patents, 27 of them Microsoft patents.
Patents and the open-source movement get along awkwardly at best. Patent
law gives proprietary, exclusive rights to patent holders, but open-source
programming is built on the idea of free sharing. Newer open-source
licenses sometimes address the issue by requiring contributors to
open-source projects to grant users and developers of the software a
perpetual, royalty-free license to any patents that relate to the
contribution.
Now on News.com
Report: Microsoft says open source violates 235 patents Most hated blogger
Online radio remixes the future of music
Different companies have dealt in different ways with the open-source
patent conundrum. For example, HP has taken a pro-patent stance, while
IBM, Nokia, Sun and others have granted some rights to use some of their
patents in open-source software.
The Open Invention Network remains a relatively young effort, but it has
attracted participation this year from proprietary software giant Oracle
and from Linux support seller Canonical. A company may license the
network's patents for free as long as they promise not to assert any
patent claims against those involved in the "Linux environment."
The Free Software Foundation is working on a new draft of the General
Public License, one element of which will ban partnerships such as
the
one
struck by Novell and Microsoft.
The Linux geeks love to bash MSFT. Yet they love to copy the features and
funtionality of MSFT products. They only wish they had a product half as
powerful and feature rich as MSFT has. The Linux geeks are nothing but a
bunch of thieves intent on destroying the rights of intellectual property
owners.
Um.... do you know where MS got its original OS's from?
Do you know where Internet Explorer came from?
Do you know why MS Word, STILL a functionally inferior product to
Wordperfect, is the most popular word processor in the world?
MS hasn't had an original idea during their entire existence, and
their marketing strategy revolves around predatory capitalism.
OpenOffice has been around since 2000, and they're just NOW claiming
that they're "stealing" code for basic functionality?
Good luck with that...
You really shouldn't lecture me about MSFT. I spent the whole decade of the
1990's working for MSFT in the sales & marketing division. I didn't live
Microsoft history, I made it. Get a reality check. Your facts are laughable
and dated.
So is Microsoft's claim.
How so? Please be specific.
3396 Dead
2007-05-15 02:00:59 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 14 May 2007 21:47:28 GMT, "Billary/2008"
Post by Billary/2008
Post by m***@gmail.com
On May 14, 4:19 pm, "Billary/2008" <F#
Post by Billary/2008
http://www.rawstory.com/showoutarticle.php?src=http%3A%2F%2Fnews.com....
Report: Microsoft says open source violates 235 patents
Top Microsoft lawyer alleges in a magazine interview that the Linux kernel
and OpenOffice.org violate hundreds of the company's patents.
By Ina Friedand Stephen Shankland
Staff Writer, CNET News.com
Published: May 13, 2007, 7:35 PM PDT
Last modified: May 13, 2007, 8:30 PM PDT
Tell us what you think about this storyTalkBackE-mail this story to a
friendE-mailView this story formatted for printingPrint Add to your
del.icio.usdel.icio.us Digg this storyDigg this
Report: Microsoft says open source violates 235 patents
update Microsoft claims that free and open-source software violates 235 of
its patents, according to a magazine report published Sunday.
In an interview with Fortune, Microsoft top lawyer Brad Smith alleges that
the Linux kernel violates 42 Microsoft patents, while its user interface
and other design elements infringe on a further 65. OpenOffice.org is
accused of infringing 45, along with 83 more in other free and open-source
programs, according to Fortune.
It is not entirely clear how Microsoft might proceed in enforcing these
patents, but the company has been encouraging large tech companies that
depend on Linux to ink patent deals, starting with its controversial pact
with Novell last November. Microsoft has also cited Linux protection
playing a role in recent patent swap deals with Samsung and Fuji Xerox.
Microsoft has also had discussions but not reached a deal with Red Hat, as
noted in the Fortune article.
Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer is also quoted in the article as saying
Microsoft's open-source competitors need to "play by the same rules as the
rest of the business."
"What's fair is fair," Ballmer told Fortune. "We live in a world where we
honor, and support the honoring of, intellectual property."
The story notes that some big tech proponents of open source have been
stockpiling intellectual property as part of the Open Invention Network,
set up in 2005 by folks like Sony, Red Hat, IBM, NEC and Philips. The
article surmises that if Microsoft were to go after open source, these
companies' combined know-how might give it some patent weapons to go after
Windows.
A Microsoft representative did not immediately respond to an e-mail
seeking comment.
Given how deeply entrenched open-source software has become in the
computing industry, taking direct legal action against the open-source
realm would be a complicated, hackle-raising undertaking for Microsoft.
Customers use open-source software widely, and many major computing
companies--IBM, Dell, Sun Microsystems, Hewlett-Packard, Motorola and
Oracle, for example--support Linux work directly.
It's not the first time that open-source patent concerns have arisen. A
2004 study by a Open Source Risk Management, a company selling insurance
against risks of using open-source software, concluded that Linux could
violate at least 283 patents, 27 of them Microsoft patents.
Patents and the open-source movement get along awkwardly at best. Patent
law gives proprietary, exclusive rights to patent holders, but open-source
programming is built on the idea of free sharing. Newer open-source
licenses sometimes address the issue by requiring contributors to
open-source projects to grant users and developers of the software a
perpetual, royalty-free license to any patents that relate to the
contribution.
Now on News.com
Report: Microsoft says open source violates 235 patents Most hated blogger
Online radio remixes the future of music
Different companies have dealt in different ways with the open-source
patent conundrum. For example, HP has taken a pro-patent stance, while
IBM, Nokia, Sun and others have granted some rights to use some of their
patents in open-source software.
The Open Invention Network remains a relatively young effort, but it has
attracted participation this year from proprietary software giant Oracle
and from Linux support seller Canonical. A company may license the
network's patents for free as long as they promise not to assert any
patent claims against those involved in the "Linux environment."
The Free Software Foundation is working on a new draft of the General
Public License, one element of which will ban partnerships such as the one
struck by Novell and Microsoft.
The Linux geeks love to bash MSFT. Yet they love to copy the features and
funtionality of MSFT products. They only wish they had a product half as
powerful and feature rich as MSFT has. The Linux geeks are nothing but a
bunch of thieves intent on destroying the rights of intellectual property
owners.
Um.... do you know where MS got its original OS's from?
Do you know where Internet Explorer came from?
Do you know why MS Word, STILL a functionally inferior product to
Wordperfect, is the most popular word processor in the world?
MS hasn't had an original idea during their entire existence, and
their marketing strategy revolves around predatory capitalism.
OpenOffice has been around since 2000, and they're just NOW claiming
that they're "stealing" code for basic functionality?
Good luck with that...
You really shouldn't lecture me about MSFT. I spent the whole decade of the
1990's working for MSFT in the sales & marketing division. I didn't live
Microsoft history, I made it. Get a reality check. Your facts are laughable
and dated.
A marketing clown! Hoo, boy, that sure makes you an expert, doesn't
it?

Latest Vista bug: if you plug in a flash card on a system with
multiple drives, the kernal loses track of how many drives you have
and starts emitting "No disk" errors. Disk management is no help--it
doesn't show any disks at all.

We're still puzzling out that one. MS doesn't want the user to tell
it how many disks there are; they want to solve it themselves. And if
they can't, well, too bad.
--

"I am fully committed, as the administration's fully committed, to ensure that, with respect to every United States
attorney position in this country, we will have a presidentially appointed, Senate-confirmed United States attorney."

--Alberto Gonzales, committing perjury before Congress

Putsch: leading America to asymetric warfare since 2001

Not dead, in jail, or a slave? Thank a liberal!
Pay your taxes so the rich don't have to.
For the finest in liberal/leftist commentary,
http://www.zeppscommentaries.com
For news feed (free, 10-20 articles a day)
http://groups.yahoo.com/subscribe/zepps_news
For essays (donations accepted, 2 articles/week)
http://groups.yahoo.com/subscribe/zepps_essays

a.a. #2211 -- Bryan Zepp Jamieson
Billary/2008
2007-05-15 11:46:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by 3396 Dead
A marketing clown! Hoo, boy, that sure makes you an expert, doesn't
it?
No actually I was Field Systems Engineer (amongst another positions), but we
worked for the Sales & marketing division. And at the time MSFT was a small
enough company were we field techs knew ALL the developers, architects and
Marketing people. So I know what it takes Zippy to be a world class
Microsoft superstar. And you know what Zippy? I interviewed and rejected
thousands of self-taught assholes like you. That's your problem. You
probably applied for a job at MSFT and were rejected for being under
qualified and just plain stupid. You took it personally, as well you
should. You self-taught Linux geeks are all morons.
3396 Dead
2007-05-15 13:21:46 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 15 May 2007 11:46:38 GMT, "Billary/2008"
Post by Billary/2008
Post by 3396 Dead
A marketing clown! Hoo, boy, that sure makes you an expert, doesn't
it?
No actually I was Field Systems Engineer (amongst another positions), but we
worked for the Sales & marketing division. And at the time MSFT was a small
enough company were we field techs knew ALL the developers, architects and
Marketing people. So I know what it takes Zippy to be a world class
Microsoft superstar. And you know what Zippy? I interviewed and rejected
thousands of self-taught assholes like you. That's your problem. You
probably applied for a job at MSFT and were rejected for being under
qualified and just plain stupid. You took it personally, as well you
should. You self-taught Linux geeks are all morons.
An "engineer" working in marketing?

Now that's just plain sad. Couldn't you get a real job?
--

"I am fully committed, as the administration's fully committed, to ensure that, with respect to every United States
attorney position in this country, we will have a presidentially appointed, Senate-confirmed United States attorney."

--Alberto Gonzales, committing perjury before Congress

Putsch: leading America to asymetric warfare since 2001

Not dead, in jail, or a slave? Thank a liberal!
Pay your taxes so the rich don't have to.
For the finest in liberal/leftist commentary,
http://www.zeppscommentaries.com
For news feed (free, 10-20 articles a day)
http://groups.yahoo.com/subscribe/zepps_news
For essays (donations accepted, 2 articles/week)
http://groups.yahoo.com/subscribe/zepps_essays

a.a. #2211 -- Bryan Zepp Jamieson
Billary/2008
2007-05-15 15:00:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by 3396 Dead
On Tue, 15 May 2007 11:46:38 GMT, "Billary/2008"
Post by Billary/2008
Post by 3396 Dead
A marketing clown! Hoo, boy, that sure makes you an expert, doesn't
it?
No actually I was Field Systems Engineer (amongst another positions), but we
worked for the Sales & marketing division. And at the time MSFT was a small
enough company were we field techs knew ALL the developers, architects and
Marketing people. So I know what it takes Zippy to be a world class
Microsoft superstar. And you know what Zippy? I interviewed and rejected
thousands of self-taught assholes like you. That's your problem. You
probably applied for a job at MSFT and were rejected for being under
qualified and just plain stupid. You took it personally, as well you
should. You self-taught Linux geeks are all morons.
An "engineer" working in marketing?
Now that's just plain sad. Couldn't you get a real job?
That statement alone demonstrates how little you know about the software
industry and corporate America in particular. ALL technology companies have
Engineers working in their respective sales/marketing divisions. It's how
sales get done. The sales and marketing people pull the customer in and the
technical guys SELL the customer on fabulous technology. You obviously have
no idea what it's like to sit in a room full of very bright, very talented
MIS professionals and talk about the foundation and vision of your
technology. An idiot like you wouldn't know that because you've never
worked for the software industry, a major corporation or went to college for
"technology". You're just another one of the undisciplined, self-taught,
computer geek rabble that infests the planet. The best you'll ever do is
your backroom support desk job. So make the best of it, this is as good as
it gets for you.
3402 Dead
2007-05-15 15:24:38 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 15 May 2007 15:00:55 GMT, "Billary/2008"
Post by Billary/2008
Post by 3396 Dead
On Tue, 15 May 2007 11:46:38 GMT, "Billary/2008"
Post by Billary/2008
Post by 3396 Dead
A marketing clown! Hoo, boy, that sure makes you an expert, doesn't
it?
No actually I was Field Systems Engineer (amongst another positions), but we
worked for the Sales & marketing division. And at the time MSFT was a small
enough company were we field techs knew ALL the developers, architects and
Marketing people. So I know what it takes Zippy to be a world class
Microsoft superstar. And you know what Zippy? I interviewed and rejected
thousands of self-taught assholes like you. That's your problem. You
probably applied for a job at MSFT and were rejected for being under
qualified and just plain stupid. You took it personally, as well you
should. You self-taught Linux geeks are all morons.
An "engineer" working in marketing?
Now that's just plain sad. Couldn't you get a real job?
That statement alone demonstrates how little you know about the software
industry and corporate America in particular.
Actually, it brings it into sharp focus.

Large corporations are far less efficient or capable than small
businesses, despite the advantages of economics of scale, and none can
even match the federal government for efficiency.
Post by Billary/2008
ALL technology companies have
Engineers working in their respective sales/marketing divisions. It's how
sales get done. The sales and marketing people pull the customer in and the
technical guys SELL the customer on fabulous technology. You obviously have
no idea what it's like to sit in a room full of very bright, very talented
MIS professionals and talk about the foundation and vision of your
technology. An idiot like you wouldn't know that because you've never
worked for the software industry, a major corporation or went to college for
"technology". You're just another one of the undisciplined, self-taught,
computer geek rabble that infests the planet. The best you'll ever do is
your backroom support desk job. So make the best of it, this is as good as
it gets for you.
OK, "engineer", explain why Vista gets confused over how many disks
are in the computer, and when you go to disk management to reassure it
that the computer, in fact, has two HDs and six removeable drives, you
find yourself looking at a blank screen, and not long after that, you
get the blue screen of death?
--

"I am fully committed, as the administration's fully committed, to ensure that, with respect to every United States
attorney position in this country, we will have a presidentially appointed, Senate-confirmed United States attorney."

--Alberto Gonzales, committing perjury before Congress

Putsch: leading America to asymetric warfare since 2001

Not dead, in jail, or a slave? Thank a liberal!
Pay your taxes so the rich don't have to.
For the finest in liberal/leftist commentary,
http://www.zeppscommentaries.com
For news feed (free, 10-20 articles a day)
http://groups.yahoo.com/subscribe/zepps_news
For essays (donations accepted, 2 articles/week)
http://groups.yahoo.com/subscribe/zepps_essays

a.a. #2211 -- Bryan Zepp Jamieson
Billary/2008
2007-05-15 16:07:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by 3402 Dead
On Tue, 15 May 2007 15:00:55 GMT, "Billary/2008"
Post by Billary/2008
Post by 3396 Dead
On Tue, 15 May 2007 11:46:38 GMT, "Billary/2008"
Post by Billary/2008
Post by 3396 Dead
A marketing clown! Hoo, boy, that sure makes you an expert, doesn't
it?
No actually I was Field Systems Engineer (amongst another positions),
but
we
worked for the Sales & marketing division. And at the time MSFT was a small
enough company were we field techs knew ALL the developers, architects and
Marketing people. So I know what it takes Zippy to be a world class
Microsoft superstar. And you know what Zippy? I interviewed and rejected
thousands of self-taught assholes like you. That's your problem. You
probably applied for a job at MSFT and were rejected for being under
qualified and just plain stupid. You took it personally, as well you
should. You self-taught Linux geeks are all morons.
An "engineer" working in marketing?
Now that's just plain sad. Couldn't you get a real job?
That statement alone demonstrates how little you know about the software
industry and corporate America in particular.
Actually, it brings it into sharp focus.
Large corporations are far less efficient or capable than small
businesses, despite the advantages of economics of scale, and none can
even match the federal government for efficiency.
Post by Billary/2008
ALL technology companies have
Engineers working in their respective sales/marketing divisions. It's how
sales get done. The sales and marketing people pull the customer in and the
technical guys SELL the customer on fabulous technology. You obviously have
no idea what it's like to sit in a room full of very bright, very talented
MIS professionals and talk about the foundation and vision of your
technology. An idiot like you wouldn't know that because you've never
worked for the software industry, a major corporation or went to college for
"technology". You're just another one of the undisciplined, self-taught,
computer geek rabble that infests the planet. The best you'll ever do is
your backroom support desk job. So make the best of it, this is as good as
it gets for you.
OK, "engineer", explain why Vista gets confused over how many disks
are in the computer, and when you go to disk management to reassure it
that the computer, in fact, has two HDs and six removeable drives, you
find yourself looking at a blank screen, and not long after that, you
get the blue screen of death?
I think I've seen this problem once before. It occurred on a crashed
machine after the user first tried to reinstall the recovery volume that
came with the machine and THEN tried to upgrade to VISTA. The recovery
volume installed itself to the 2nd disk. Thus when VISTA tried to install
it found the boot volume on Disk 1 instead of Disk 0. But every situation
is different. I did a search at Microsoft.com and found 9 articles. try
this link to see any of the choices match the problem you are having.

http://support.microsoft.com/search/default.aspx?catalog=LCID%3D1033&spid=11732&query=multiple+disk+error&adv=
.
2007-05-22 07:12:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by Billary/2008
Post by 3402 Dead
On Tue, 15 May 2007 15:00:55 GMT, "Billary/2008"
Post by Billary/2008
Post by 3396 Dead
On Tue, 15 May 2007 11:46:38 GMT, "Billary/2008"
Post by Billary/2008
Post by 3396 Dead
A marketing clown! Hoo, boy, that sure makes you an expert, doesn't
it?
No actually I was Field Systems Engineer (amongst another positions),
but
we
worked for the Sales & marketing division. And at the time MSFT was a small
enough company were we field techs knew ALL the developers, architects and
Marketing people. So I know what it takes Zippy to be a world class
Microsoft superstar. And you know what Zippy? I interviewed and rejected
thousands of self-taught assholes like you. That's your problem. You
probably applied for a job at MSFT and were rejected for being under
qualified and just plain stupid. You took it personally, as well you
should. You self-taught Linux geeks are all morons.
An "engineer" working in marketing?
Now that's just plain sad. Couldn't you get a real job?
That statement alone demonstrates how little you know about the software
industry and corporate America in particular.
Actually, it brings it into sharp focus.
Large corporations are far less efficient or capable than small
businesses, despite the advantages of economics of scale, and none can
even match the federal government for efficiency.
Post by Billary/2008
ALL technology companies have
Engineers working in their respective sales/marketing divisions. It's how
sales get done. The sales and marketing people pull the customer in and the
technical guys SELL the customer on fabulous technology. You obviously have
no idea what it's like to sit in a room full of very bright, very talented
MIS professionals and talk about the foundation and vision of your
technology. An idiot like you wouldn't know that because you've never
worked for the software industry, a major corporation or went to college for
"technology". You're just another one of the undisciplined, self-taught,
computer geek rabble that infests the planet. The best you'll ever do is
your backroom support desk job. So make the best of it, this is as good as
it gets for you.
OK, "engineer", explain why Vista gets confused over how many disks
are in the computer, and when you go to disk management to reassure it
that the computer, in fact, has two HDs and six removeable drives, you
find yourself looking at a blank screen, and not long after that, you
get the blue screen of death?
I think I've seen this problem once before. It occurred on a crashed
machine after the user first tried to reinstall the recovery volume that
came with the machine and THEN tried to upgrade to VISTA. The recovery
volume installed itself to the 2nd disk. Thus when VISTA tried to install
it found the boot volume on Disk 1 instead of Disk 0. But every situation
is different. I did a search at Microsoft.com and found 9 articles. try
this link to see any of the choices match the problem you are having.
http://support.microsoft.com/search/default.aspx?catalog=LCID%3D1033&spid=11732&query=multiple+disk+error&adv=
Hey, our own fucking right wing zero and combo "Vista" expert!
3425 Dead
2007-05-22 13:51:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by .
Post by Billary/2008
Post by 3402 Dead
On Tue, 15 May 2007 15:00:55 GMT, "Billary/2008"
Post by Billary/2008
Post by 3396 Dead
On Tue, 15 May 2007 11:46:38 GMT, "Billary/2008"
Post by Billary/2008
Post by 3396 Dead
A marketing clown! Hoo, boy, that sure makes you an expert, doesn't
it?
No actually I was Field Systems Engineer (amongst another positions),
but
we
worked for the Sales & marketing division. And at the time MSFT was a small
enough company were we field techs knew ALL the developers, architects and
Marketing people. So I know what it takes Zippy to be a world class
Microsoft superstar. And you know what Zippy? I interviewed and rejected
thousands of self-taught assholes like you. That's your problem. You
probably applied for a job at MSFT and were rejected for being under
qualified and just plain stupid. You took it personally, as well you
should. You self-taught Linux geeks are all morons.
An "engineer" working in marketing?
Now that's just plain sad. Couldn't you get a real job?
That statement alone demonstrates how little you know about the software
industry and corporate America in particular.
Actually, it brings it into sharp focus.
Large corporations are far less efficient or capable than small
businesses, despite the advantages of economics of scale, and none can
even match the federal government for efficiency.
Post by Billary/2008
ALL technology companies have
Engineers working in their respective sales/marketing divisions. It's how
sales get done. The sales and marketing people pull the customer in and the
technical guys SELL the customer on fabulous technology. You obviously have
no idea what it's like to sit in a room full of very bright, very talented
MIS professionals and talk about the foundation and vision of your
technology. An idiot like you wouldn't know that because you've never
worked for the software industry, a major corporation or went to college for
"technology". You're just another one of the undisciplined, self-taught,
computer geek rabble that infests the planet. The best you'll ever do is
your backroom support desk job. So make the best of it, this is as good as
it gets for you.
OK, "engineer", explain why Vista gets confused over how many disks
are in the computer, and when you go to disk management to reassure it
that the computer, in fact, has two HDs and six removeable drives, you
find yourself looking at a blank screen, and not long after that, you
get the blue screen of death?
I think I've seen this problem once before. It occurred on a crashed
machine after the user first tried to reinstall the recovery volume that
came with the machine and THEN tried to upgrade to VISTA. The recovery
volume installed itself to the 2nd disk. Thus when VISTA tried to install
it found the boot volume on Disk 1 instead of Disk 0. But every situation
is different. I did a search at Microsoft.com and found 9 articles. try
this link to see any of the choices match the problem you are having.
http://support.microsoft.com/search/default.aspx?catalog=LCID%3D1033&spid=11732&query=multiple+disk+error&adv=
Hey, our own fucking right wing zero and combo "Vista" expert!
Actually, the case was a "clean" install. It turns out that if you
just leave disk management on screen long enough (I happened to check
in on it at about 35 minutes, planning on closing it) it will pop up
with the list of drives, and then you can rename them and the system
will be happy for a while. But it does recur.

Apparently Vista bombs, too. I know a guy (new machine, clean
install) who is getting memory dump screens at least twice a day
without warning. The machine doesn't have to be doing anything he
says. It just randomly crashes. No warning, which would be pretty
frustrating.

Between Microsoft making it hard to have two OSes on the same machine,
the legal push against Linux, and now Gonzales pushing life sentences
for music and software pirates, it looks like corporate America has
decided that now is the time for an utterly captive, even slave
market.
--

"I am fully committed, as the administration's fully committed, to ensure that, with respect to every United States
attorney position in this country, we will have a presidentially appointed, Senate-confirmed United States attorney."

--Alberto Gonzales, committing perjury before Congress

Putsch: leading America to asymetric warfare since 2001

Not dead, in jail, or a slave? Thank a liberal!
Pay your taxes so the rich don't have to.
For the finest in liberal/leftist commentary,
http://www.zeppscommentaries.com
For news feed (free, 10-20 articles a day)
http://groups.yahoo.com/subscribe/zepps_news
For essays (donations accepted, 2 articles/week)
http://groups.yahoo.com/subscribe/zepps_essays

a.a. #2211 -- Bryan Zepp Jamieson
l***@yahoo.com
2007-05-22 23:32:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by 3425 Dead
Post by .
Post by Billary/2008
Post by 3402 Dead
On Tue, 15 May 2007 15:00:55 GMT, "Billary/2008"
Post by Billary/2008
Post by 3396 Dead
On Tue, 15 May 2007 11:46:38 GMT, "Billary/2008"
Post by Billary/2008
Post by 3396 Dead
A marketing clown! Hoo, boy, that sure makes you an
expert, doesn't it?
No actually I was Field Systems Engineer (amongst
another positions), but
we
worked for the Sales & marketing division. And at the
time MSFT was a small
enough company were we field techs knew ALL the
developers, architects and
Marketing people. So I know what it takes Zippy to be
a world class Microsoft superstar. And you know what
Zippy? I interviewed and rejected
thousands of self-taught assholes like you. That's
your problem. You probably applied for a job at MSFT
and were rejected for being under qualified and just
plain stupid. You took it personally, as well you
should. You self-taught Linux geeks are all morons.
An "engineer" working in marketing?
Now that's just plain sad. Couldn't you get a real job?
That statement alone demonstrates how little you know
about the software industry and corporate America in
particular.
Actually, it brings it into sharp focus.
Large corporations are far less efficient or capable than
small businesses, despite the advantages of economics of
scale, and none can even match the federal government for
efficiency.
Post by Billary/2008
ALL technology companies have
Engineers working in their respective sales/marketing
divisions. It's how sales get done. The sales and
marketing people pull the customer in and the
technical guys SELL the customer on fabulous technology.
You obviously have
no idea what it's like to sit in a room full of very
bright, very talented MIS professionals and talk about
the foundation and vision of your technology. An idiot
like you wouldn't know that because you've never worked
for the software industry, a major corporation or went to
college for
"technology". You're just another one of the
undisciplined, self-taught, computer geek rabble that
infests the planet. The best you'll ever do is your
backroom support desk job. So make the best of it, this
is as good as
it gets for you.
OK, "engineer", explain why Vista gets confused over how
many disks are in the computer, and when you go to disk
management to reassure it that the computer, in fact, has
two HDs and six removeable drives, you find yourself
looking at a blank screen, and not long after that, you
get the blue screen of death?
I think I've seen this problem once before. It occurred on
a crashed machine after the user first tried to reinstall
the recovery volume that came with the machine and THEN
tried to upgrade to VISTA. The recovery volume installed
itself to the 2nd disk. Thus when VISTA tried to install
it found the boot volume on Disk 1 instead of Disk 0. But
every situation is different. I did a search at
Microsoft.com and found 9 articles. try this link to see
any of the choices match the problem you are having.
http://support.microsoft.com/search/default.aspx?catalog=LCI
D%3D1033&spid=11732&query=multiple+disk+error&adv=
Hey, our own fucking right wing zero and combo "Vista"
expert!
Actually, the case was a "clean" install. It turns out that
if you just leave disk management on screen long enough (I
happened to check in on it at about 35 minutes, planning on
closing it) it will pop up with the list of drives, and then
you can rename them and the system will be happy for a while.
But it does recur.
Apparently Vista bombs, too. I know a guy (new machine,
clean install) who is getting memory dump screens at least
twice a day without warning. The machine doesn't have to be
doing anything he says. It just randomly crashes. No
warning, which would be pretty frustrating.
"Not doing anything"???? Try listening to the hard drive. Vista,
like XP, will run in the background and the drive will buzz like
crazy. I'm guessing it's one additional year less of life
expectancy for the drive just because of Vista for every actual
year of use.

I had a Word file, under Vista, that Word said was corrupt. Odd
that this was the second time the file was unreadable because
after re-creating the file, I printed it, then saved it, and
immediately reopened it. It opened fine. 24 hours later....Word
claims the file can't be read.
Post by 3425 Dead
Between Microsoft making it hard to have two OSes on the same
machine, the legal push against Linux, and now Gonzales
pushing life sentences for music and software pirates, it
looks like corporate America has decided that now is the time
for an utterly captive, even slave market.
--
"I am fully committed, as the administration's fully
committed, to ensure that, with respect to every United
States attorney position in this country, we will have a
presidentially appointed, Senate-confirmed United States
attorney."
--Alberto Gonzales, committing perjury before Congress
Putsch: leading America to asymetric warfare since 2001
Not dead, in jail, or a slave? Thank a liberal!
Pay your taxes so the rich don't have to.
For the finest in liberal/leftist commentary,
http://www.zeppscommentaries.com
For news feed (free, 10-20 articles a day)
http://groups.yahoo.com/subscribe/zepps_news
For essays (donations accepted, 2 articles/week)
http://groups.yahoo.com/subscribe/zepps_essays
a.a. #2211 -- Bryan Zepp Jamieson
3425 Dead
2007-05-23 03:27:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by l***@yahoo.com
Post by 3425 Dead
Post by .
Post by Billary/2008
Post by 3402 Dead
On Tue, 15 May 2007 15:00:55 GMT, "Billary/2008"
Post by Billary/2008
Post by 3396 Dead
On Tue, 15 May 2007 11:46:38 GMT, "Billary/2008"
Post by Billary/2008
Post by 3396 Dead
A marketing clown! Hoo, boy, that sure makes you an
expert, doesn't it?
No actually I was Field Systems Engineer (amongst
another positions), but
we
worked for the Sales & marketing division. And at the
time MSFT was a small
enough company were we field techs knew ALL the
developers, architects and
Marketing people. So I know what it takes Zippy to be
a world class Microsoft superstar. And you know what
Zippy? I interviewed and rejected
thousands of self-taught assholes like you. That's
your problem. You probably applied for a job at MSFT
and were rejected for being under qualified and just
plain stupid. You took it personally, as well you
should. You self-taught Linux geeks are all morons.
An "engineer" working in marketing?
Now that's just plain sad. Couldn't you get a real job?
That statement alone demonstrates how little you know
about the software industry and corporate America in
particular.
Actually, it brings it into sharp focus.
Large corporations are far less efficient or capable than
small businesses, despite the advantages of economics of
scale, and none can even match the federal government for
efficiency.
Post by Billary/2008
ALL technology companies have
Engineers working in their respective sales/marketing
divisions. It's how sales get done. The sales and
marketing people pull the customer in and the
technical guys SELL the customer on fabulous technology.
You obviously have
no idea what it's like to sit in a room full of very
bright, very talented MIS professionals and talk about
the foundation and vision of your technology. An idiot
like you wouldn't know that because you've never worked
for the software industry, a major corporation or went to
college for
"technology". You're just another one of the
undisciplined, self-taught, computer geek rabble that
infests the planet. The best you'll ever do is your
backroom support desk job. So make the best of it, this
is as good as
it gets for you.
OK, "engineer", explain why Vista gets confused over how
many disks are in the computer, and when you go to disk
management to reassure it that the computer, in fact, has
two HDs and six removeable drives, you find yourself
looking at a blank screen, and not long after that, you
get the blue screen of death?
I think I've seen this problem once before. It occurred on
a crashed machine after the user first tried to reinstall
the recovery volume that came with the machine and THEN
tried to upgrade to VISTA. The recovery volume installed
itself to the 2nd disk. Thus when VISTA tried to install
it found the boot volume on Disk 1 instead of Disk 0. But
every situation is different. I did a search at
Microsoft.com and found 9 articles. try this link to see
any of the choices match the problem you are having.
http://support.microsoft.com/search/default.aspx?catalog=LCI
D%3D1033&spid=11732&query=multiple+disk+error&adv=
Hey, our own fucking right wing zero and combo "Vista"
expert!
Actually, the case was a "clean" install. It turns out that
if you just leave disk management on screen long enough (I
happened to check in on it at about 35 minutes, planning on
closing it) it will pop up with the list of drives, and then
you can rename them and the system will be happy for a while.
But it does recur.
Apparently Vista bombs, too. I know a guy (new machine,
clean install) who is getting memory dump screens at least
twice a day without warning. The machine doesn't have to be
doing anything he says. It just randomly crashes. No
warning, which would be pretty frustrating.
"Not doing anything"???? Try listening to the hard drive. Vista,
like XP, will run in the background and the drive will buzz like
crazy. I'm guessing it's one additional year less of life
expectancy for the drive just because of Vista for every actual
year of use.
I had a Word file, under Vista, that Word said was corrupt. Odd
that this was the second time the file was unreadable because
after re-creating the file, I printed it, then saved it, and
immediately reopened it. It opened fine. 24 hours later....Word
claims the file can't be read.
I'm glad I don't use Word.

The UAC won't let you send in registration for new software. Only
Windows doesn't cop to the fact that it's the UAC; it just says you
need administrative priviledges. Which is frustrating when you are
the administrator.
Post by l***@yahoo.com
Post by 3425 Dead
Between Microsoft making it hard to have two OSes on the same
machine, the legal push against Linux, and now Gonzales
pushing life sentences for music and software pirates, it
looks like corporate America has decided that now is the time
for an utterly captive, even slave market.
--
"I am fully committed, as the administration's fully
committed, to ensure that, with respect to every United
States attorney position in this country, we will have a
presidentially appointed, Senate-confirmed United States
attorney."
--Alberto Gonzales, committing perjury before Congress
Putsch: leading America to asymetric warfare since 2001
Not dead, in jail, or a slave? Thank a liberal!
Pay your taxes so the rich don't have to.
For the finest in liberal/leftist commentary,
http://www.zeppscommentaries.com
For news feed (free, 10-20 articles a day)
http://groups.yahoo.com/subscribe/zepps_news
For essays (donations accepted, 2 articles/week)
http://groups.yahoo.com/subscribe/zepps_essays
a.a. #2211 -- Bryan Zepp Jamieson
--

"I am fully committed, as the administration's fully committed, to ensure that, with respect to every United States
attorney position in this country, we will have a presidentially appointed, Senate-confirmed United States attorney."

--Alberto Gonzales, committing perjury before Congress

Putsch: leading America to asymetric warfare since 2001

Not dead, in jail, or a slave? Thank a liberal!
Pay your taxes so the rich don't have to.
For the finest in liberal/leftist commentary,
http://www.zeppscommentaries.com
For news feed (free, 10-20 articles a day)
http://groups.yahoo.com/subscribe/zepps_news
For essays (donations accepted, 2 articles/week)
http://groups.yahoo.com/subscribe/zepps_essays

a.a. #2211 -- Bryan Zepp Jamieson
l***@yahoo.com
2007-05-23 23:59:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by 3425 Dead
Post by l***@yahoo.com
Post by 3425 Dead
Post by .
Post by Billary/2008
Post by 3402 Dead
On Tue, 15 May 2007 15:00:55 GMT, "Billary/2008"
Post by Billary/2008
Post by 3396 Dead
On Tue, 15 May 2007 11:46:38 GMT, "Billary/2008"
Post by Billary/2008
Post by 3396 Dead
A marketing clown! Hoo, boy, that sure makes you an
expert, doesn't it?
No actually I was Field Systems Engineer (amongst
another positions), but
we
worked for the Sales & marketing division. And at
the time MSFT was a small
enough company were we field techs knew ALL the
developers, architects and
Marketing people. So I know what it takes Zippy to
be a world class Microsoft superstar. And you know
what Zippy? I interviewed and rejected
thousands of self-taught assholes like you. That's
your problem. You probably applied for a job at MSFT
and were rejected for being under qualified and just
plain stupid. You took it personally, as well you
should. You self-taught Linux geeks are all morons.
An "engineer" working in marketing?
Now that's just plain sad. Couldn't you get a real
job?
That statement alone demonstrates how little you know
about the software industry and corporate America in
particular.
Actually, it brings it into sharp focus.
Large corporations are far less efficient or capable
than small businesses, despite the advantages of
economics of scale, and none can even match the federal
government for efficiency.
Post by Billary/2008
ALL technology companies have
Engineers working in their respective sales/marketing
divisions. It's how sales get done. The sales and
marketing people pull the customer in and the
technical guys SELL the customer on fabulous
technology. You obviously have
no idea what it's like to sit in a room full of very
bright, very talented MIS professionals and talk about
the foundation and vision of your technology. An idiot
like you wouldn't know that because you've never worked
for the software industry, a major corporation or went
to college for
"technology". You're just another one of the
undisciplined, self-taught, computer geek rabble that
infests the planet. The best you'll ever do is your
backroom support desk job. So make the best of it,
this is as good as
it gets for you.
OK, "engineer", explain why Vista gets confused over how
many disks are in the computer, and when you go to disk
management to reassure it that the computer, in fact,
has two HDs and six removeable drives, you find yourself
looking at a blank screen, and not long after that, you
get the blue screen of death?
I think I've seen this problem once before. It occurred
on a crashed machine after the user first tried to
reinstall the recovery volume that came with the machine
and THEN tried to upgrade to VISTA. The recovery volume
installed itself to the 2nd disk. Thus when VISTA tried
to install it found the boot volume on Disk 1 instead of
Disk 0. But every situation is different. I did a
search at Microsoft.com and found 9 articles. try this
link to see any of the choices match the problem you are
having.
http://support.microsoft.com/search/default.aspx?catalog=L
CI D%3D1033&spid=11732&query=multiple+disk+error&adv=
Hey, our own fucking right wing zero and combo "Vista"
expert!
Actually, the case was a "clean" install. It turns out
that if you just leave disk management on screen long
enough (I happened to check in on it at about 35 minutes,
planning on closing it) it will pop up with the list of
drives, and then you can rename them and the system will be
happy for a while.
But it does recur.
Apparently Vista bombs, too. I know a guy (new machine,
clean install) who is getting memory dump screens at least
twice a day without warning. The machine doesn't have to
be doing anything he says. It just randomly crashes. No
warning, which would be pretty frustrating.
"Not doing anything"???? Try listening to the hard drive.
Vista, like XP, will run in the background and the drive will
buzz like crazy. I'm guessing it's one additional year less
of life expectancy for the drive just because of Vista for
every actual year of use.
I had a Word file, under Vista, that Word said was corrupt.
Odd that this was the second time the file was unreadable
because after re-creating the file, I printed it, then saved
it, and immediately reopened it. It opened fine. 24 hours
later....Word claims the file can't be read.
I'm glad I don't use Word.
The UAC won't let you send in registration for new software.
Only Windows doesn't cop to the fact that it's the UAC; it
just says you need administrative priviledges. Which is
frustrating when you are the administrator.
Post by l***@yahoo.com
Post by 3425 Dead
Between Microsoft making it hard to have two OSes on the
same machine, the legal push against Linux, and now
Gonzales pushing life sentences for music and software
pirates, it looks like corporate America has decided that
now is the time for an utterly captive, even slave market.
--
Speaking of cative and slave markets...I'm laughing over that
Coke Cola secretary who just get 8 years for trying to sell the
"recipe". She was lucky she didn't get the death penalty,
although she may have a health problem for which prison officials
will refuse to allow treatment...and she loses her pension.

I compare the sentence for stealing a recipe to the sentence for
bribery of members of Congress and Congressional staffers, and
the sentences given to members of Congress and Congressional
staffers who accept bribes. Nice to know some prosecutors and
judges know what's really important.
Post by 3425 Dead
Post by l***@yahoo.com
Post by 3425 Dead
"I am fully committed, as the administration's fully
committed, to ensure that, with respect to every United
States attorney position in this country, we will have a
presidentially appointed, Senate-confirmed United States
attorney."
--Alberto Gonzales, committing perjury before Congress
Putsch: leading America to asymetric warfare since 2001
Not dead, in jail, or a slave? Thank a liberal!
Pay your taxes so the rich don't have to.
For the finest in liberal/leftist commentary,
http://www.zeppscommentaries.com
For news feed (free, 10-20 articles a day)
http://groups.yahoo.com/subscribe/zepps_news
For essays (donations accepted, 2 articles/week)
http://groups.yahoo.com/subscribe/zepps_essays
a.a. #2211 -- Bryan Zepp Jamieson
--
"I am fully committed, as the administration's fully
committed, to ensure that, with respect to every United
States attorney position in this country, we will have a
presidentially appointed, Senate-confirmed United States
attorney."
--Alberto Gonzales, committing perjury before Congress
Putsch: leading America to asymetric warfare since 2001
Not dead, in jail, or a slave? Thank a liberal!
Pay your taxes so the rich don't have to.
For the finest in liberal/leftist commentary,
http://www.zeppscommentaries.com
For news feed (free, 10-20 articles a day)
http://groups.yahoo.com/subscribe/zepps_news
For essays (donations accepted, 2 articles/week)
http://groups.yahoo.com/subscribe/zepps_essays
a.a. #2211 -- Bryan Zepp Jamieson
z***@netscape.net
2007-05-15 15:01:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by 3396 Dead
On Tue, 15 May 2007 11:46:38 GMT, "Billary/2008"
Post by Billary/2008
Post by 3396 Dead
A marketing clown! Hoo, boy, that sure makes you an expert, doesn't
it?
No actually I was Field Systems Engineer (amongst another positions), but we
worked for the Sales & marketing division. And at the time MSFT was a small
enough company were we field techs knew ALL the developers, architects and
Marketing people. So I know what it takes Zippy to be a world class
Microsoft superstar. And you know what Zippy? I interviewed and rejected
thousands of self-taught assholes like you. That's your problem. You
probably applied for a job at MSFT and were rejected for being under
qualified and just plain stupid. You took it personally, as well you
should. You self-taught Linux geeks are all morons.
An "engineer" working in marketing?
Now that's just plain sad. Couldn't you get a real job?
Well, there's millions of engineers working in marketing anymore.
Since the only so-called "engineering" jobs left
anymore are moron jobs with Exxon Shrinks.
Post by 3396 Dead
--
"I am fully committed, as the administration's fully committed, to ensure that, with respect to every United States
attorney position in this country, we will have a presidentially appointed, Senate-confirmed United States attorney."
--Alberto Gonzales, committing perjury before Congress
Putsch: leading America to asymetric warfare since 2001
Not dead, in jail, or a slave? Thank a liberal!
Pay your taxes so the rich don't have to.
For the finest in liberal/leftist commentary,http://www.zeppscommentaries.com
For news feed (free, 10-20 articles a day)http://groups.yahoo.com/subscribe/zepps_news
For essays (donations accepted, 2 articles/week)http://groups.yahoo.com/subscribe/zepps_essays
a.a. #2211 -- Bryan Zepp Jamieson- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
l***@yahoo.com
2007-05-15 23:06:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by 3396 Dead
On Tue, 15 May 2007 11:46:38 GMT, "Billary/2008"
Post by Billary/2008
Post by 3396 Dead
A marketing clown! Hoo, boy, that sure makes you an
expert, doesn't it?
No actually I was Field Systems Engineer (amongst another
positions), but we worked for the Sales & marketing division.
And at the time MSFT was a small enough company were we
field techs knew ALL the developers, architects and Marketing
people. So I know what it takes Zippy to be a world class
Microsoft superstar. And you know what Zippy? I interviewed
and rejected thousands of self-taught assholes like you.
That's your problem. You probably applied for a job at MSFT
and were rejected for being under qualified and just plain
stupid. You took it personally, as well you should. You
self-taught Linux geeks are all morons.
An "engineer" working in marketing?
That's like "vice president" in a bank...big title, small salary.

"Among other positions"? Sounds like some important or highly
talented person's idiot brother-in-law. Shuffled from department
to department after department heads became sick of this wacko's
nonsense.

"Interviewed thousands"? As an interview lasts several
hours...think he might be padding his resume a tad?

Of course, his job might have been to escort a candidate from
department to department.

If he really works/worked for Microsoft, it explains why M/S
products are steamy piles-o-crap.

He might have been part of Microsoft's field sanitary engineering
department. (He might have trouble spelling "sanitary".)

Funny thing about his denigration of self-taught
programmers....Bill Gates didn't have a degree in computer
science. Odd too that self-taught hackers can break through all
the security built into Windows by all those marvelous degreed
programmers he wants us to believe he hired.
Post by 3396 Dead
Now that's just plain sad. Couldn't you get a real job?
--
"I am fully committed, as the administration's fully
committed, to ensure that, with respect to every United
States attorney position in this country, we will have a
presidentially appointed, Senate-confirmed United States
attorney."
--Alberto Gonzales, committing perjury before Congress
Putsch: leading America to asymetric warfare since 2001
Not dead, in jail, or a slave? Thank a liberal!
Pay your taxes so the rich don't have to.
For the finest in liberal/leftist commentary,
http://www.zeppscommentaries.com
For news feed (free, 10-20 articles a day)
http://groups.yahoo.com/subscribe/zepps_news
For essays (donations accepted, 2 articles/week)
http://groups.yahoo.com/subscribe/zepps_essays
a.a. #2211 -- Bryan Zepp Jamieson
Steve
2007-05-16 01:09:17 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 15 May 2007 06:21:46 -0700, 3396 Dead
Post by 3396 Dead
On Tue, 15 May 2007 11:46:38 GMT, "Billary/2008"
Post by Billary/2008
Post by 3396 Dead
A marketing clown! Hoo, boy, that sure makes you an expert, doesn't
it?
No actually I was Field Systems Engineer (amongst another positions), but we
worked for the Sales & marketing division. And at the time MSFT was a small
enough company were we field techs knew ALL the developers, architects and
Marketing people. So I know what it takes Zippy to be a world class
Microsoft superstar. And you know what Zippy? I interviewed and rejected
thousands of self-taught assholes like you. That's your problem. You
probably applied for a job at MSFT and were rejected for being under
qualified and just plain stupid. You took it personally, as well you
should. You self-taught Linux geeks are all morons.
An "engineer" working in marketing?
Now that's just plain sad. Couldn't you get a real job?
This is from Zepp... who takes dictation for a living...
.
2007-05-20 05:07:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by 3396 Dead
On Tue, 15 May 2007 11:46:38 GMT, "Billary/2008"
Post by Billary/2008
Post by 3396 Dead
A marketing clown! Hoo, boy, that sure makes you an expert, doesn't
it?
No actually I was Field Systems Engineer (amongst another positions), but we
worked for the Sales & marketing division. And at the time MSFT was a small
enough company were we field techs knew ALL the developers, architects and
Marketing people. So I know what it takes Zippy to be a world class
Microsoft superstar. And you know what Zippy? I interviewed and rejected
thousands of self-taught assholes like you. That's your problem. You
probably applied for a job at MSFT and were rejected for being under
qualified and just plain stupid. You took it personally, as well you
should. You self-taught Linux geeks are all morons.
An "engineer" working in marketing?
Now that's just plain sad. Couldn't you get a real job?
--
"I am fully committed, as the administration's fully committed, to ensure that, with respect to every United States
attorney position in this country, we will have a presidentially appointed, Senate-confirmed United States attorney."
--Alberto Gonzales, committing perjury before Congress
Putsch: leading America to asymetric warfare since 2001
Not dead, in jail, or a slave? Thank a liberal!
Pay your taxes so the rich don't have to.
For the finest in liberal/leftist commentary,
http://www.zeppscommentaries.com
For news feed (free, 10-20 articles a day)
http://groups.yahoo.com/subscribe/zepps_news
For essays (donations accepted, 2 articles/week)
http://groups.yahoo.com/subscribe/zepps_essays
a.a. #2211 -- Bryan Zepp Jamieson
Yeh, Billary is an engineer like I'm a fucking astronaut!

He's too fucking retarded to ever deal with the common math!
Another fucking worthless marketeer who never did a goddam
thing himself. No wonder he sucks Republican dicks on the
internet.
.
2007-05-15 02:25:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by Billary/2008
Post by m***@gmail.com
On May 14, 4:19 pm, "Billary/2008" <F#
Post by Billary/2008
http://www.rawstory.com/showoutarticle.php?src=http%3A%2F%2Fnews.com....
Report: Microsoft says open source violates 235 patents
Top Microsoft lawyer alleges in a magazine interview that the Linux kernel
and OpenOffice.org violate hundreds of the company's patents.
By Ina Friedand Stephen Shankland
Staff Writer, CNET News.com
Published: May 13, 2007, 7:35 PM PDT
Last modified: May 13, 2007, 8:30 PM PDT
Tell us what you think about this storyTalkBackE-mail this story to a
friendE-mailView this story formatted for printingPrint Add to your
del.icio.usdel.icio.us Digg this storyDigg this
Report: Microsoft says open source violates 235 patents
update Microsoft claims that free and open-source software violates 235 of
its patents, according to a magazine report published Sunday.
In an interview with Fortune, Microsoft top lawyer Brad Smith alleges that
the Linux kernel violates 42 Microsoft patents, while its user interface
and other design elements infringe on a further 65. OpenOffice.org is
accused of infringing 45, along with 83 more in other free and open-source
programs, according to Fortune.
It is not entirely clear how Microsoft might proceed in enforcing these
patents, but the company has been encouraging large tech companies that
depend on Linux to ink patent deals, starting with its controversial pact
with Novell last November. Microsoft has also cited Linux protection
playing a role in recent patent swap deals with Samsung and Fuji Xerox.
Microsoft has also had discussions but not reached a deal with Red Hat, as
noted in the Fortune article.
Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer is also quoted in the article as saying
Microsoft's open-source competitors need to "play by the same rules as the
rest of the business."
"What's fair is fair," Ballmer told Fortune. "We live in a world where we
honor, and support the honoring of, intellectual property."
The story notes that some big tech proponents of open source have been
stockpiling intellectual property as part of the Open Invention Network,
set up in 2005 by folks like Sony, Red Hat, IBM, NEC and Philips. The
article surmises that if Microsoft were to go after open source, these
companies' combined know-how might give it some patent weapons to go after
Windows.
A Microsoft representative did not immediately respond to an e-mail
seeking comment.
Given how deeply entrenched open-source software has become in the
computing industry, taking direct legal action against the open-source
realm would be a complicated, hackle-raising undertaking for Microsoft.
Customers use open-source software widely, and many major computing
companies--IBM, Dell, Sun Microsystems, Hewlett-Packard, Motorola and
Oracle, for example--support Linux work directly.
It's not the first time that open-source patent concerns have arisen. A
2004 study by a Open Source Risk Management, a company selling insurance
against risks of using open-source software, concluded that Linux could
violate at least 283 patents, 27 of them Microsoft patents.
Patents and the open-source movement get along awkwardly at best. Patent
law gives proprietary, exclusive rights to patent holders, but open-source
programming is built on the idea of free sharing. Newer open-source
licenses sometimes address the issue by requiring contributors to
open-source projects to grant users and developers of the software a
perpetual, royalty-free license to any patents that relate to the
contribution.
Now on News.com
Report: Microsoft says open source violates 235 patents Most hated blogger
Online radio remixes the future of music
Different companies have dealt in different ways with the open-source
patent conundrum. For example, HP has taken a pro-patent stance, while
IBM, Nokia, Sun and others have granted some rights to use some of their
patents in open-source software.
The Open Invention Network remains a relatively young effort, but it has
attracted participation this year from proprietary software giant Oracle
and from Linux support seller Canonical. A company may license the
network's patents for free as long as they promise not to assert any
patent claims against those involved in the "Linux environment."
The Free Software Foundation is working on a new draft of the General
Public License, one element of which will ban partnerships such as the one
struck by Novell and Microsoft.
The Linux geeks love to bash MSFT. Yet they love to copy the features and
funtionality of MSFT products. They only wish they had a product half as
powerful and feature rich as MSFT has. The Linux geeks are nothing but a
bunch of thieves intent on destroying the rights of intellectual property
owners.
Um.... do you know where MS got its original OS's from?
Do you know where Internet Explorer came from?
Do you know why MS Word, STILL a functionally inferior product to
Wordperfect, is the most popular word processor in the world?
MS hasn't had an original idea during their entire existence, and
their marketing strategy revolves around predatory capitalism.
OpenOffice has been around since 2000, and they're just NOW claiming
that they're "stealing" code for basic functionality?
Good luck with that...
You really shouldn't lecture me about MSFT. I spent the whole decade of the
1990's working for MSFT in the sales & marketing division. I didn't live
Microsoft history, I made it. Get a reality check. Your facts are laughable
and dated.
Were you the pathetic little right wing thug you are now back then too?
Surely you must have been, I assume you were sucking all the right wing
cocks you could find then as well.
What Me Worry?
2007-05-14 21:17:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by Billary/2008
http://www.rawstory.com/showoutarticle.php?src=http%3A%2F%2Fnews.com.com%2FReport%2BMicrosoft%2Bsays%2Bopen%2Bsource%2Bviolates%2B235%2Bpatents%2F2100-1014_3-6183437.html
Report: Microsoft says open source violates 235 patents
Top Microsoft lawyer alleges in a magazine interview that the Linux
kernel and OpenOffice.org violate hundreds of the company's patents.
By Ina Friedand Stephen Shankland
Staff Writer, CNET News.com
Published: May 13, 2007, 7:35 PM PDT
Last modified: May 13, 2007, 8:30 PM PDT
Tell us what you think about this storyTalkBackE-mail this story to a
friendE-mailView this story formatted for printingPrint Add to your
del.icio.usdel.icio.us Digg this storyDigg this
Report: Microsoft says open source violates 235 patents
update Microsoft claims that free and open-source software violates 235
of its patents, according to a magazine report published Sunday.
In an interview with Fortune, Microsoft top lawyer Brad Smith alleges
that the Linux kernel violates 42 Microsoft patents, while its user
interface and other design elements infringe on a further 65.
OpenOffice.org is accused of infringing 45, along with 83 more in other
free and open-source programs, according to Fortune.
It is not entirely clear how Microsoft might proceed in enforcing these
patents, but the company has been encouraging large tech companies that
depend on Linux to ink patent deals, starting with its controversial pact
with Novell last November. Microsoft has also cited Linux protection
playing a role in recent patent swap deals with Samsung and Fuji Xerox.
Microsoft has also had discussions but not reached a deal with Red Hat,
as noted in the Fortune article.
Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer is also quoted in the article as saying
Microsoft's open-source competitors need to "play by the same rules as
the rest of the business."
"What's fair is fair," Ballmer told Fortune. "We live in a world where we
honor, and support the honoring of, intellectual property."
The story notes that some big tech proponents of open source have been
stockpiling intellectual property as part of the Open Invention Network,
set up in 2005 by folks like Sony, Red Hat, IBM, NEC and Philips. The
article surmises that if Microsoft were to go after open source, these
companies' combined know-how might give it some patent weapons to go
after Windows.
A Microsoft representative did not immediately respond to an e-mail
seeking comment.
Given how deeply entrenched open-source software has become in the
computing industry, taking direct legal action against the open-source
realm would be a complicated, hackle-raising undertaking for Microsoft.
Customers use open-source software widely, and many major computing
companies--IBM, Dell, Sun Microsystems, Hewlett-Packard, Motorola and
Oracle, for example--support Linux work directly.
It's not the first time that open-source patent concerns have arisen. A
2004 study by a Open Source Risk Management, a company selling insurance
against risks of using open-source software, concluded that Linux could
violate at least 283 patents, 27 of them Microsoft patents.
Patents and the open-source movement get along awkwardly at best. Patent
law gives proprietary, exclusive rights to patent holders, but
open-source programming is built on the idea of free sharing. Newer
open-source licenses sometimes address the issue by requiring
contributors to open-source projects to grant users and developers of the
software a perpetual, royalty-free license to any patents that relate to
the contribution.
Now on News.com
Report: Microsoft says open source violates 235 patents Most hated
blogger on the planet? Photos: Engineering lessons learned from Katrina
Extra: Online radio remixes the future of music
Different companies have dealt in different ways with the open-source
patent conundrum. For example, HP has taken a pro-patent stance, while
IBM, Nokia, Sun and others have granted some rights to use some of their
patents in open-source software.
The Open Invention Network remains a relatively young effort, but it has
attracted participation this year from proprietary software giant Oracle
and from Linux support seller Canonical. A company may license the
network's patents for free as long as they promise not to assert any
patent claims against those involved in the "Linux environment."
The Free Software Foundation is working on a new draft of the General
Public License, one element of which will ban partnerships such as the
one struck by Novell and Microsoft.
The Linux geeks love to bash MSFT. Yet they love to copy the features and
funtionality of MSFT products. They only wish they had a product half as
powerful and feature rich as MSFT has. The Linux geeks are nothing but a
bunch of thieves intent on destroying the rights of intellectual property
owners.
Billary, try pulling your head out of your ass at least once a month...

Linux's kernel is based upon open-source codebases dating back to the early
days of UNIX. The user interface runs on top of the open-sourced X-windows
system. These codebases were in use before the earliest version of Windows,
which was developed *in response to* the X-windows and the [then dominant]
Macintosh operating system. It was Microsoft that copied its features and
GUI design from Apple (who copied it from Xerox PARC in the late 1970's),
not the other way around.

Since the open source movement is very strict about only using open sourced
codebases, and since another company (SCO) has already attempted to sue
Linux out of existence - and failed miserably - I don't think anybody is too
worried about Microsoft. If they're smart, they'll co-opt Linux (embrace
and extend) rather than attempt to sue it out of existence (which will
fail). They're likely attempting a multi-pronged attack.

It its infamous lawsuit, SCO claimed that it had evidence of significant
patent infringement in the Linux codebase. As it turned out, they were
lying. They had nothing. Nada. Zilch. The case was thrown out - but not
until their stock had soared many months, making the execs and their lawyers
very rich. MSFT is very likely attempting a more expensive version of the
SCO gambit: Spew massive FUD all over the headlines, drag the case out for
a couple of years, watch your stock climb as you threaten large Linux shops
(especially recent converts) with crippling lawsuits should they continue to
resist Microsoft's expensive, bloated, insecure, bug-ridden, proprietary
products. Typical monopolist tactics.

There's a reason that Microsoft has been likened to the alient "Borg" from
Star Trek. Resistance is futile.
Billary/2008
2007-05-14 21:52:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by What Me Worry?
Post by Billary/2008
http://www.rawstory.com/showoutarticle.php?src=http%3A%2F%2Fnews.com.com%2FReport%2BMicrosoft%2Bsays%2Bopen%2Bsource%2Bviolates%2B235%2Bpatents%2F2100-1014_3-6183437.html
Report: Microsoft says open source violates 235 patents
Top Microsoft lawyer alleges in a magazine interview that the Linux
kernel and OpenOffice.org violate hundreds of the company's patents.
By Ina Friedand Stephen Shankland
Staff Writer, CNET News.com
Published: May 13, 2007, 7:35 PM PDT
Last modified: May 13, 2007, 8:30 PM PDT
Tell us what you think about this storyTalkBackE-mail this story to a
friendE-mailView this story formatted for printingPrint Add to your
del.icio.usdel.icio.us Digg this storyDigg this
Report: Microsoft says open source violates 235 patents
update Microsoft claims that free and open-source software violates 235
of its patents, according to a magazine report published Sunday.
In an interview with Fortune, Microsoft top lawyer Brad Smith alleges
that the Linux kernel violates 42 Microsoft patents, while its user
interface and other design elements infringe on a further 65.
OpenOffice.org is accused of infringing 45, along with 83 more in other
free and open-source programs, according to Fortune.
It is not entirely clear how Microsoft might proceed in enforcing these
patents, but the company has been encouraging large tech companies that
depend on Linux to ink patent deals, starting with its controversial
pact with Novell last November. Microsoft has also cited Linux
protection playing a role in recent patent swap deals with Samsung and
Fuji Xerox. Microsoft has also had discussions but not reached a deal
with Red Hat, as noted in the Fortune article.
Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer is also quoted in the article as saying
Microsoft's open-source competitors need to "play by the same rules as
the rest of the business."
"What's fair is fair," Ballmer told Fortune. "We live in a world where
we honor, and support the honoring of, intellectual property."
The story notes that some big tech proponents of open source have been
stockpiling intellectual property as part of the Open Invention Network,
set up in 2005 by folks like Sony, Red Hat, IBM, NEC and Philips. The
article surmises that if Microsoft were to go after open source, these
companies' combined know-how might give it some patent weapons to go
after Windows.
A Microsoft representative did not immediately respond to an e-mail
seeking comment.
Given how deeply entrenched open-source software has become in the
computing industry, taking direct legal action against the open-source
realm would be a complicated, hackle-raising undertaking for Microsoft.
Customers use open-source software widely, and many major computing
companies--IBM, Dell, Sun Microsystems, Hewlett-Packard, Motorola and
Oracle, for example--support Linux work directly.
It's not the first time that open-source patent concerns have arisen. A
2004 study by a Open Source Risk Management, a company selling insurance
against risks of using open-source software, concluded that Linux could
violate at least 283 patents, 27 of them Microsoft patents.
Patents and the open-source movement get along awkwardly at best. Patent
law gives proprietary, exclusive rights to patent holders, but
open-source programming is built on the idea of free sharing. Newer
open-source licenses sometimes address the issue by requiring
contributors to open-source projects to grant users and developers of
the software a perpetual, royalty-free license to any patents that
relate to the contribution.
Now on News.com
Report: Microsoft says open source violates 235 patents Most hated
blogger on the planet? Photos: Engineering lessons learned from Katrina
Extra: Online radio remixes the future of music
Different companies have dealt in different ways with the open-source
patent conundrum. For example, HP has taken a pro-patent stance, while
IBM, Nokia, Sun and others have granted some rights to use some of their
patents in open-source software.
The Open Invention Network remains a relatively young effort, but it has
attracted participation this year from proprietary software giant Oracle
and from Linux support seller Canonical. A company may license the
network's patents for free as long as they promise not to assert any
patent claims against those involved in the "Linux environment."
The Free Software Foundation is working on a new draft of the General
Public License, one element of which will ban partnerships such as the
one struck by Novell and Microsoft.
The Linux geeks love to bash MSFT. Yet they love to copy the features
and funtionality of MSFT products. They only wish they had a product
half as powerful and feature rich as MSFT has. The Linux geeks are
nothing but a bunch of thieves intent on destroying the rights of
intellectual property owners.
Billary, try pulling your head out of your ass at least once a month...
Linux's kernel is based upon open-source codebases dating back to the
early days of UNIX. The user interface runs on top of the open-sourced
X-windows system. These codebases were in use before the earliest version
of Windows, which was developed *in response to* the X-windows and the
[then dominant] Macintosh operating system. It was Microsoft that copied
its features and GUI design from Apple (who copied it from Xerox PARC in
the late 1970's), not the other way around.
Since the open source movement is very strict about only using open
sourced codebases, and since another company (SCO) has already attempted
to sue Linux out of existence - and failed miserably - I don't think
anybody is too worried about Microsoft. If they're smart, they'll co-opt
Linux (embrace and extend) rather than attempt to sue it out of existence
(which will fail). They're likely attempting a multi-pronged attack.
It its infamous lawsuit, SCO claimed that it had evidence of significant
patent infringement in the Linux codebase. As it turned out, they were
lying. They had nothing. Nada. Zilch. The case was thrown out - but not
until their stock had soared many months, making the execs and their
lawyers very rich. MSFT is very likely attempting a more expensive
version of the SCO gambit: Spew massive FUD all over the headlines, drag
the case out for a couple of years, watch your stock climb as you threaten
large Linux shops (especially recent converts) with crippling lawsuits
should they continue to resist Microsoft's expensive, bloated, insecure,
bug-ridden, proprietary products. Typical monopolist tactics.
There's a reason that Microsoft has been likened to the alient "Borg" from
Star Trek. Resistance is futile.
Take YOUR head out of YOUR ass. MSFT isn't trying to kill Linux, they're
trying to defend their patents. Any owner of intellectual property would do
the same. You're so critical of the MS-OS yet assholes like you aren't
qualified to write a single line of code beyond "hello world". So shut the
fuck up you thief.
l***@yahoo.com
2007-05-14 23:56:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by Billary/2008
Post by What Me Worry?
Post by Billary/2008
http://www.rawstory.com/showoutarticle.php?src=http%3A%2F%2
Fnews.com.com%2FReport%2BMicrosoft%2Bsays%2Bopen%2Bsource%2
Bviolates%2B235%2Bpatents%2F2100-1014_3-6183437.html
Report: Microsoft says open source violates 235 patents
Top Microsoft lawyer alleges in a magazine interview that
the Linux kernel and OpenOffice.org violate hundreds of
the company's patents. By Ina Friedand Stephen Shankland
Staff Writer, CNET News.com
Published: May 13, 2007, 7:35 PM PDT
Last modified: May 13, 2007, 8:30 PM PDT
Tell us what you think about this storyTalkBackE-mail this
story to a friendE-mailView this story formatted for
printingPrint Add to your del.icio.usdel.icio.us Digg this
storyDigg this Report: Microsoft says open source violates
235 patents
update Microsoft claims that free and open-source software
violates 235 of its patents, according to a magazine
report published Sunday.
In an interview with Fortune, Microsoft top lawyer Brad
Smith alleges that the Linux kernel violates 42 Microsoft
patents, while its user interface and other design
elements infringe on a further 65. OpenOffice.org is
accused of infringing 45, along with 83 more in other
free and open-source programs, according to Fortune.
It is not entirely clear how Microsoft might proceed in
enforcing these patents, but the company has been
encouraging large tech companies that depend on Linux to
ink patent deals, starting with its controversial pact
with Novell last November. Microsoft has also cited Linux
protection playing a role in recent patent swap deals with
Samsung and Fuji Xerox. Microsoft has also had discussions
but not reached a deal with Red Hat, as noted in the
Fortune article.
Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer is also quoted in the article
as saying Microsoft's open-source competitors need to
"play by the same rules as the rest of the business."
"What's fair is fair," Ballmer told Fortune. "We live in a
world where we honor, and support the honoring of,
intellectual property."
The story notes that some big tech proponents of open
source have been stockpiling intellectual property as part
of the Open Invention Network, set up in 2005 by folks
like Sony, Red Hat, IBM, NEC and Philips. The article
surmises that if Microsoft were to go after open source,
these companies' combined know-how might give it some
patent weapons to go after Windows.
A Microsoft representative did not immediately respond to
an e-mail seeking comment.
Given how deeply entrenched open-source software has
become in the computing industry, taking direct legal
action against the open-source realm would be a
complicated, hackle-raising undertaking for Microsoft.
Customers use open-source software widely, and many major
computing companies--IBM, Dell, Sun Microsystems,
Hewlett-Packard, Motorola and Oracle, for example--support
Linux work directly.
It's not the first time that open-source patent concerns
have arisen. A 2004 study by a Open Source Risk
Management, a company selling insurance against risks of
using open-source software, concluded that Linux could
violate at least 283 patents, 27 of them Microsoft
patents.
Patents and the open-source movement get along awkwardly
at best. Patent law gives proprietary, exclusive rights to
patent holders, but open-source programming is built on
the idea of free sharing. Newer open-source licenses
sometimes address the issue by requiring contributors to
open-source projects to grant users and developers of
the software a perpetual, royalty-free license to any
patents that relate to the contribution.
Now on News.com
Report: Microsoft says open source violates 235 patents
Most hated blogger on the planet? Photos: Engineering
lessons learned from Katrina Extra: Online radio remixes
the future of music
Different companies have dealt in different ways with the
open-source patent conundrum. For example, HP has taken a
pro-patent stance, while IBM, Nokia, Sun and others have
granted some rights to use some of their patents in
open-source software.
The Open Invention Network remains a relatively young
effort, but it has attracted participation this year from
proprietary software giant Oracle and from Linux support
seller Canonical. A company may license the network's
patents for free as long as they promise not to assert any
patent claims against those involved in the "Linux
environment."
The Free Software Foundation is working on a new draft of
the General Public License, one element of which will ban
partnerships such as the one struck by Novell and
Microsoft.
The Linux geeks love to bash MSFT. Yet they love to copy
the features and funtionality of MSFT products. They only
wish they had a product half as powerful and feature rich
as MSFT has. The Linux geeks are nothing but a bunch of
thieves intent on destroying the rights of intellectual
property owners.
Billary, try pulling your head out of your ass at least once
a month...
Linux's kernel is based upon open-source codebases dating
back to the early days of UNIX. The user interface runs on
top of the open-sourced X-windows system. These codebases
were in use before the earliest version of Windows, which
was developed *in response to* the X-windows and the [then
dominant] Macintosh operating system. It was Microsoft that
copied its features and GUI design from Apple (who copied it
from Xerox PARC in the late 1970's), not the other way
around.
Since the open source movement is very strict about only
using open sourced codebases, and since another company
(SCO) has already attempted to sue Linux out of existence -
and failed miserably - I don't think anybody is too worried
about Microsoft. If they're smart, they'll co-opt Linux
(embrace and extend) rather than attempt to sue it out of
existence (which will fail). They're likely attempting a
multi-pronged attack.
It its infamous lawsuit, SCO claimed that it had evidence of
significant patent infringement in the Linux codebase. As
it turned out, they were lying. They had nothing. Nada.
Zilch. The case was thrown out - but not until their stock
had soared many months, making the execs and their lawyers
very rich. MSFT is very likely attempting a more expensive
version of the SCO gambit: Spew massive FUD all over the
headlines, drag the case out for a couple of years, watch
your stock climb as you threaten large Linux shops
(especially recent converts) with crippling lawsuits should
they continue to resist Microsoft's expensive, bloated,
insecure, bug-ridden, proprietary products. Typical
monopolist tactics.
There's a reason that Microsoft has been likened to the
alient "Borg" from Star Trek. Resistance is futile.
Take YOUR head out of YOUR ass. MSFT isn't trying to kill
Linux, they're trying to defend their patents. Any owner of
intellectual property would do the same. You're so critical
of the MS-OS yet assholes like you aren't qualified to write
a single line of code beyond "hello world". So shut the fuck
up you thief.
And Bill stole windows from Steve who stole it from Xerox

So shut the fuck up, you thief.
Billary/2008
2007-05-15 00:06:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by l***@yahoo.com
Post by Billary/2008
Post by What Me Worry?
Post by Billary/2008
http://www.rawstory.com/showoutarticle.php?src=http%3A%2F%2
Fnews.com.com%2FReport%2BMicrosoft%2Bsays%2Bopen%2Bsource%2
Bviolates%2B235%2Bpatents%2F2100-1014_3-6183437.html
Report: Microsoft says open source violates 235 patents
Top Microsoft lawyer alleges in a magazine interview that
the Linux kernel and OpenOffice.org violate hundreds of
the company's patents. By Ina Friedand Stephen Shankland
Staff Writer, CNET News.com
Published: May 13, 2007, 7:35 PM PDT
Last modified: May 13, 2007, 8:30 PM PDT
Tell us what you think about this storyTalkBackE-mail this
story to a friendE-mailView this story formatted for
printingPrint Add to your del.icio.usdel.icio.us Digg this
storyDigg this Report: Microsoft says open source violates
235 patents
update Microsoft claims that free and open-source software
violates 235 of its patents, according to a magazine
report published Sunday.
In an interview with Fortune, Microsoft top lawyer Brad
Smith alleges that the Linux kernel violates 42 Microsoft
patents, while its user interface and other design
elements infringe on a further 65. OpenOffice.org is
accused of infringing 45, along with 83 more in other
free and open-source programs, according to Fortune.
It is not entirely clear how Microsoft might proceed in
enforcing these patents, but the company has been
encouraging large tech companies that depend on Linux to
ink patent deals, starting with its controversial pact
with Novell last November. Microsoft has also cited Linux
protection playing a role in recent patent swap deals with
Samsung and Fuji Xerox. Microsoft has also had discussions
but not reached a deal with Red Hat, as noted in the
Fortune article.
Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer is also quoted in the article
as saying Microsoft's open-source competitors need to
"play by the same rules as the rest of the business."
"What's fair is fair," Ballmer told Fortune. "We live in a
world where we honor, and support the honoring of,
intellectual property."
The story notes that some big tech proponents of open
source have been stockpiling intellectual property as part
of the Open Invention Network, set up in 2005 by folks
like Sony, Red Hat, IBM, NEC and Philips. The article
surmises that if Microsoft were to go after open source,
these companies' combined know-how might give it some
patent weapons to go after Windows.
A Microsoft representative did not immediately respond to
an e-mail seeking comment.
Given how deeply entrenched open-source software has
become in the computing industry, taking direct legal
action against the open-source realm would be a
complicated, hackle-raising undertaking for Microsoft.
Customers use open-source software widely, and many major
computing companies--IBM, Dell, Sun Microsystems,
Hewlett-Packard, Motorola and Oracle, for example--support
Linux work directly.
It's not the first time that open-source patent concerns
have arisen. A 2004 study by a Open Source Risk
Management, a company selling insurance against risks of
using open-source software, concluded that Linux could
violate at least 283 patents, 27 of them Microsoft
patents.
Patents and the open-source movement get along awkwardly
at best. Patent law gives proprietary, exclusive rights to
patent holders, but open-source programming is built on
the idea of free sharing. Newer open-source licenses
sometimes address the issue by requiring contributors to
open-source projects to grant users and developers of
the software a perpetual, royalty-free license to any
patents that relate to the contribution.
Now on News.com
Report: Microsoft says open source violates 235 patents
Most hated blogger on the planet? Photos: Engineering
lessons learned from Katrina Extra: Online radio remixes
the future of music
Different companies have dealt in different ways with the
open-source patent conundrum. For example, HP has taken a
pro-patent stance, while IBM, Nokia, Sun and others have
granted some rights to use some of their patents in
open-source software.
The Open Invention Network remains a relatively young
effort, but it has attracted participation this year from
proprietary software giant Oracle and from Linux support
seller Canonical. A company may license the network's
patents for free as long as they promise not to assert any
patent claims against those involved in the "Linux
environment."
The Free Software Foundation is working on a new draft of
the General Public License, one element of which will ban
partnerships such as the one struck by Novell and
Microsoft.
The Linux geeks love to bash MSFT. Yet they love to copy
the features and funtionality of MSFT products. They only
wish they had a product half as powerful and feature rich
as MSFT has. The Linux geeks are nothing but a bunch of
thieves intent on destroying the rights of intellectual
property owners.
Billary, try pulling your head out of your ass at least once
a month...
Linux's kernel is based upon open-source codebases dating
back to the early days of UNIX. The user interface runs on
top of the open-sourced X-windows system. These codebases
were in use before the earliest version of Windows, which
was developed *in response to* the X-windows and the [then
dominant] Macintosh operating system. It was Microsoft that
copied its features and GUI design from Apple (who copied it
from Xerox PARC in the late 1970's), not the other way
around.
Since the open source movement is very strict about only
using open sourced codebases, and since another company
(SCO) has already attempted to sue Linux out of existence -
and failed miserably - I don't think anybody is too worried
about Microsoft. If they're smart, they'll co-opt Linux
(embrace and extend) rather than attempt to sue it out of
existence (which will fail). They're likely attempting a
multi-pronged attack.
It its infamous lawsuit, SCO claimed that it had evidence of
significant patent infringement in the Linux codebase. As
it turned out, they were lying. They had nothing. Nada.
Zilch. The case was thrown out - but not until their stock
had soared many months, making the execs and their lawyers
very rich. MSFT is very likely attempting a more expensive
version of the SCO gambit: Spew massive FUD all over the
headlines, drag the case out for a couple of years, watch
your stock climb as you threaten large Linux shops
(especially recent converts) with crippling lawsuits should
they continue to resist Microsoft's expensive, bloated,
insecure, bug-ridden, proprietary products. Typical
monopolist tactics.
There's a reason that Microsoft has been likened to the
alient "Borg" from Star Trek. Resistance is futile.
Take YOUR head out of YOUR ass. MSFT isn't trying to kill
Linux, they're trying to defend their patents. Any owner of
intellectual property would do the same. You're so critical
of the MS-OS yet assholes like you aren't qualified to write
a single line of code beyond "hello world". So shut the fuck
up you thief.
And Bill stole windows from Steve who stole it from Xerox
So shut the fuck up, you thief.
Wrong asshole. Steve stole it from Xerox, then sold it to Bill. Stop
talking out of your ass.
Gandalf Grey
2007-05-15 00:15:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by Billary/2008
Post by l***@yahoo.com
Post by Billary/2008
Post by What Me Worry?
Post by Billary/2008
http://www.rawstory.com/showoutarticle.php?src=http%3A%2F%2
Fnews.com.com%2FReport%2BMicrosoft%2Bsays%2Bopen%2Bsource%2
Bviolates%2B235%2Bpatents%2F2100-1014_3-6183437.html
Report: Microsoft says open source violates 235 patents
Top Microsoft lawyer alleges in a magazine interview that
the Linux kernel and OpenOffice.org violate hundreds of
the company's patents. By Ina Friedand Stephen Shankland
Staff Writer, CNET News.com
Published: May 13, 2007, 7:35 PM PDT
Last modified: May 13, 2007, 8:30 PM PDT
Tell us what you think about this storyTalkBackE-mail this
story to a friendE-mailView this story formatted for
printingPrint Add to your del.icio.usdel.icio.us Digg this
storyDigg this Report: Microsoft says open source violates
235 patents
update Microsoft claims that free and open-source software
violates 235 of its patents, according to a magazine
report published Sunday.
In an interview with Fortune, Microsoft top lawyer Brad
Smith alleges that the Linux kernel violates 42 Microsoft
patents, while its user interface and other design
elements infringe on a further 65. OpenOffice.org is
accused of infringing 45, along with 83 more in other
free and open-source programs, according to Fortune.
It is not entirely clear how Microsoft might proceed in
enforcing these patents, but the company has been
encouraging large tech companies that depend on Linux to
ink patent deals, starting with its controversial pact
with Novell last November. Microsoft has also cited Linux
protection playing a role in recent patent swap deals with
Samsung and Fuji Xerox. Microsoft has also had discussions
but not reached a deal with Red Hat, as noted in the
Fortune article.
Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer is also quoted in the article
as saying Microsoft's open-source competitors need to
"play by the same rules as the rest of the business."
"What's fair is fair," Ballmer told Fortune. "We live in a
world where we honor, and support the honoring of,
intellectual property."
The story notes that some big tech proponents of open
source have been stockpiling intellectual property as part
of the Open Invention Network, set up in 2005 by folks
like Sony, Red Hat, IBM, NEC and Philips. The article
surmises that if Microsoft were to go after open source,
these companies' combined know-how might give it some
patent weapons to go after Windows.
A Microsoft representative did not immediately respond to
an e-mail seeking comment.
Given how deeply entrenched open-source software has
become in the computing industry, taking direct legal
action against the open-source realm would be a
complicated, hackle-raising undertaking for Microsoft.
Customers use open-source software widely, and many major
computing companies--IBM, Dell, Sun Microsystems,
Hewlett-Packard, Motorola and Oracle, for example--support
Linux work directly.
It's not the first time that open-source patent concerns
have arisen. A 2004 study by a Open Source Risk
Management, a company selling insurance against risks of
using open-source software, concluded that Linux could
violate at least 283 patents, 27 of them Microsoft
patents.
Patents and the open-source movement get along awkwardly
at best. Patent law gives proprietary, exclusive rights to
patent holders, but open-source programming is built on
the idea of free sharing. Newer open-source licenses
sometimes address the issue by requiring contributors to
open-source projects to grant users and developers of
the software a perpetual, royalty-free license to any
patents that relate to the contribution.
Now on News.com
Report: Microsoft says open source violates 235 patents
Most hated blogger on the planet? Photos: Engineering
lessons learned from Katrina Extra: Online radio remixes
the future of music
Different companies have dealt in different ways with the
open-source patent conundrum. For example, HP has taken a
pro-patent stance, while IBM, Nokia, Sun and others have
granted some rights to use some of their patents in
open-source software.
The Open Invention Network remains a relatively young
effort, but it has attracted participation this year from
proprietary software giant Oracle and from Linux support
seller Canonical. A company may license the network's
patents for free as long as they promise not to assert any
patent claims against those involved in the "Linux
environment."
The Free Software Foundation is working on a new draft of
the General Public License, one element of which will ban
partnerships such as the one struck by Novell and
Microsoft.
The Linux geeks love to bash MSFT. Yet they love to copy
the features and funtionality of MSFT products. They only
wish they had a product half as powerful and feature rich
as MSFT has. The Linux geeks are nothing but a bunch of
thieves intent on destroying the rights of intellectual
property owners.
Billary, try pulling your head out of your ass at least once a month...
Linux's kernel is based upon open-source codebases dating
back to the early days of UNIX. The user interface runs on
top of the open-sourced X-windows system. These codebases
were in use before the earliest version of Windows, which
was developed *in response to* the X-windows and the [then
dominant] Macintosh operating system. It was Microsoft that
copied its features and GUI design from Apple (who copied it
from Xerox PARC in the late 1970's), not the other way
around.
Since the open source movement is very strict about only
using open sourced codebases, and since another company
(SCO) has already attempted to sue Linux out of existence -
and failed miserably - I don't think anybody is too worried
about Microsoft. If they're smart, they'll co-opt Linux
(embrace and extend) rather than attempt to sue it out of
existence (which will fail). They're likely attempting a
multi-pronged attack.
It its infamous lawsuit, SCO claimed that it had evidence of
significant patent infringement in the Linux codebase. As
it turned out, they were lying. They had nothing. Nada.
Zilch. The case was thrown out - but not until their stock
had soared many months, making the execs and their lawyers
very rich. MSFT is very likely attempting a more expensive
version of the SCO gambit: Spew massive FUD all over the
headlines, drag the case out for a couple of years, watch
your stock climb as you threaten large Linux shops
(especially recent converts) with crippling lawsuits should
they continue to resist Microsoft's expensive, bloated,
insecure, bug-ridden, proprietary products. Typical
monopolist tactics.
There's a reason that Microsoft has been likened to the
alient "Borg" from Star Trek. Resistance is futile.
Take YOUR head out of YOUR ass. MSFT isn't trying to kill
Linux, they're trying to defend their patents. Any owner of
intellectual property would do the same. You're so critical
of the MS-OS yet assholes like you aren't qualified to write
a single line of code beyond "hello world". So shut the fuck
up you thief.
And Bill stole windows from Steve who stole it from Xerox
So shut the fuck up, you thief.
Wrong asshole. Steve stole it from Xerox, then sold it to Bill. Stop
talking out of your ass.
Why insist in others what you do not insist in yourself, Shill?

You've been pulling nearly your entire louvre out of your ass since the
moment you started posting.
What Me Worry?
2007-05-15 01:52:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by Billary/2008
Post by What Me Worry?
Post by Billary/2008
http://www.rawstory.com/showoutarticle.php?src=http%3A%2F%2Fnews.com.com%2FReport%2BMicrosoft%2Bsays%2Bopen%2Bsource%2Bviolates%2B235%2Bpatents%2F2100-1014_3-6183437.html
Report: Microsoft says open source violates 235 patents
Top Microsoft lawyer alleges in a magazine interview that the Linux
kernel and OpenOffice.org violate hundreds of the company's patents.
By Ina Friedand Stephen Shankland
Staff Writer, CNET News.com
Published: May 13, 2007, 7:35 PM PDT
Last modified: May 13, 2007, 8:30 PM PDT
Tell us what you think about this storyTalkBackE-mail this story to a
friendE-mailView this story formatted for printingPrint Add to your
del.icio.usdel.icio.us Digg this storyDigg this
Report: Microsoft says open source violates 235 patents
update Microsoft claims that free and open-source software violates 235
of its patents, according to a magazine report published Sunday.
In an interview with Fortune, Microsoft top lawyer Brad Smith alleges
that the Linux kernel violates 42 Microsoft patents, while its user
interface and other design elements infringe on a further 65.
OpenOffice.org is accused of infringing 45, along with 83 more in other
free and open-source programs, according to Fortune.
It is not entirely clear how Microsoft might proceed in enforcing these
patents, but the company has been encouraging large tech companies that
depend on Linux to ink patent deals, starting with its controversial
pact with Novell last November. Microsoft has also cited Linux
protection playing a role in recent patent swap deals with Samsung and
Fuji Xerox. Microsoft has also had discussions but not reached a deal
with Red Hat, as noted in the Fortune article.
Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer is also quoted in the article as saying
Microsoft's open-source competitors need to "play by the same rules as
the rest of the business."
"What's fair is fair," Ballmer told Fortune. "We live in a world where
we honor, and support the honoring of, intellectual property."
The story notes that some big tech proponents of open source have been
stockpiling intellectual property as part of the Open Invention
Network, set up in 2005 by folks like Sony, Red Hat, IBM, NEC and
Philips. The article surmises that if Microsoft were to go after open
source, these companies' combined know-how might give it some patent
weapons to go after Windows.
A Microsoft representative did not immediately respond to an e-mail
seeking comment.
Given how deeply entrenched open-source software has become in the
computing industry, taking direct legal action against the open-source
realm would be a complicated, hackle-raising undertaking for Microsoft.
Customers use open-source software widely, and many major computing
companies--IBM, Dell, Sun Microsystems, Hewlett-Packard, Motorola and
Oracle, for example--support Linux work directly.
It's not the first time that open-source patent concerns have arisen. A
2004 study by a Open Source Risk Management, a company selling
insurance against risks of using open-source software, concluded that
Linux could violate at least 283 patents, 27 of them Microsoft patents.
Patents and the open-source movement get along awkwardly at best.
Patent law gives proprietary, exclusive rights to patent holders, but
open-source programming is built on the idea of free sharing. Newer
open-source licenses sometimes address the issue by requiring
contributors to open-source projects to grant users and developers of
the software a perpetual, royalty-free license to any patents that
relate to the contribution.
Now on News.com
Report: Microsoft says open source violates 235 patents Most hated
blogger on the planet? Photos: Engineering lessons learned from Katrina
Extra: Online radio remixes the future of music
Different companies have dealt in different ways with the open-source
patent conundrum. For example, HP has taken a pro-patent stance, while
IBM, Nokia, Sun and others have granted some rights to use some of
their patents in open-source software.
The Open Invention Network remains a relatively young effort, but it
has attracted participation this year from proprietary software giant
Oracle and from Linux support seller Canonical. A company may license
the network's patents for free as long as they promise not to assert
any patent claims against those involved in the "Linux environment."
The Free Software Foundation is working on a new draft of the General
Public License, one element of which will ban partnerships such as the
one struck by Novell and Microsoft.
The Linux geeks love to bash MSFT. Yet they love to copy the features
and funtionality of MSFT products. They only wish they had a product
half as powerful and feature rich as MSFT has. The Linux geeks are
nothing but a bunch of thieves intent on destroying the rights of
intellectual property owners.
Billary, try pulling your head out of your ass at least once a month...
Linux's kernel is based upon open-source codebases dating back to the
early days of UNIX. The user interface runs on top of the open-sourced
X-windows system. These codebases were in use before the earliest
version of Windows, which was developed *in response to* the X-windows
and the [then dominant] Macintosh operating system. It was Microsoft
that copied its features and GUI design from Apple (who copied it from
Xerox PARC in the late 1970's), not the other way around.
Since the open source movement is very strict about only using open
sourced codebases, and since another company (SCO) has already attempted
to sue Linux out of existence - and failed miserably - I don't think
anybody is too worried about Microsoft. If they're smart, they'll co-opt
Linux (embrace and extend) rather than attempt to sue it out of existence
(which will fail). They're likely attempting a multi-pronged attack.
It its infamous lawsuit, SCO claimed that it had evidence of significant
patent infringement in the Linux codebase. As it turned out, they were
lying. They had nothing. Nada. Zilch. The case was thrown out - but
not until their stock had soared many months, making the execs and their
lawyers very rich. MSFT is very likely attempting a more expensive
version of the SCO gambit: Spew massive FUD all over the headlines, drag
the case out for a couple of years, watch your stock climb as you
threaten large Linux shops (especially recent converts) with crippling
lawsuits should they continue to resist Microsoft's expensive, bloated,
insecure, bug-ridden, proprietary products. Typical monopolist tactics.
There's a reason that Microsoft has been likened to the alient "Borg"
from Star Trek. Resistance is futile.
Take YOUR head out of YOUR ass. MSFT isn't trying to kill Linux
Sure they are. Only a fool would suggest otherwise.
Post by Billary/2008
they're trying to defend their patents. Any owner of intellectual
property would do the same.
SCO said the same thing. And they were proven liars. So is MSFT. Let
Ballmer show us the code, or let him STFU.
Post by Billary/2008
You're so critical of the MS-OS
Where was I critical of the MS-OS (you mean Windows?) Do you specialize in
missing the point? We're not talking about Windows, we're talking about
Microsoft's blatant, FUD-fueled legal attack on Linux (and more importantly,
large, commercial Linux shops).

In addition to Linux, OpenOffice.org is named as a violator of MSFT patents.
OpenOffice is simply the open source version of Sun's commercial StarOffice
productivity suite, which has been a commercial product for 13 years. If
Sun's StarOffice was in violation of Microsoft patents, why is Microsoft
only now attempting to defend themselves?

This is monopolistic behavior. Microsoft should have been split into pieces
as a federal court originally decided. They are a menace to the
marketplace.
Post by Billary/2008
yet assholes like you aren't qualified to write a single line of code
beyond "hello world".
In Billary's Bizarro World, Linux, FreeBSD, Eclipse, the Gnu Project, the
Apache Project, X.org, OpenGL, OpenOffice.org, MySQL and many more polished,
stable, well-maintained, high-quality, usable, reliable, secure,
standards-based open source software (OSS) products were all written by
incompetents. Uh huh.

What color is the sky in Billary Bizarro World?

<desperate shrieking mercy-snipped>
z***@netscape.net
2007-05-15 02:11:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by What Me Worry?
Post by Billary/2008
Post by What Me Worry?
Post by Billary/2008
http://www.rawstory.com/showoutarticle.php?src=http%3A%2F%2Fnews.com....
Report:Microsoftsays open source violates 235 patents
TopMicrosoftlawyer alleges in a magazine interview that the Linux
kernel and OpenOffice.org violate hundreds of the company's patents.
By Ina Friedand Stephen Shankland
Staff Writer, CNET News.com
Published: May 13, 2007, 7:35 PM PDT
Last modified: May 13, 2007, 8:30 PM PDT
Tell us what you think about this storyTalkBackE-mail this story to a
friendE-mailView this story formatted for printingPrint Add to your
del.icio.usdel.icio.us Digg this storyDigg this
Report:Microsoftsays open source violates 235 patents
updateMicrosoftclaims that free and open-source software violates 235
of its patents, according to a magazine report published Sunday.
In an interview with Fortune,Microsofttop lawyer Brad Smith alleges
that the Linux kernel violates 42Microsoftpatents, while its user
interface and other design elements infringe on a further 65.
OpenOffice.org is accused of infringing 45, along with 83 more in other
free and open-source programs, according to Fortune.
It is not entirely clear howMicrosoftmight proceed in enforcing these
patents, but the company has been encouraging large tech companies that
depend on Linux to ink patent deals, starting with its controversial
pact with Novell last November.Microsofthas also cited Linux
protection playing a role in recent patent swap deals with Samsung and
Fuji Xerox.Microsofthas also had discussions but not reached a deal
with Red Hat, as noted in the Fortune article.
MicrosoftCEO Steve Ballmer is also quoted in the article as saying
Microsoft'sopen-source competitors need to "play by the same rules as
the rest of the business."
"What's fair is fair," Ballmer told Fortune. "We live in a world where
we honor, and support the honoring of, intellectual property."
The story notes that some big tech proponents of open source have been
stockpiling intellectual property as part of the Open Invention
Network, set up in 2005 by folks like Sony, Red Hat, IBM, NEC and
Philips. The article surmises that ifMicrosoftwere to go after open
source, these companies' combined know-how might give it some patent
weapons to go after Windows.
AMicrosoftrepresentative did not immediately respond to an e-mail
seeking comment.
Given how deeply entrenched open-source software has become in the
computing industry, taking direct legal action against the open-source
realm would be a complicated, hackle-raising undertaking forMicrosoft.
Customers use open-source software widely, and many major computing
companies--IBM, Dell, Sun Microsystems, Hewlett-Packard, Motorola and
Oracle, for example--support Linux work directly.
It's not the first time that open-source patent concerns have arisen. A
2004 study by a Open Source Risk Management, a company selling
insurance against risks of using open-source software, concluded that
Linux could violate at least 283 patents, 27 of themMicrosoftpatents.
Patents and the open-source movement get along awkwardly at best.
Patent law gives proprietary, exclusive rights to patent holders, but
open-source programming is built on the idea of free sharing. Newer
open-source licenses sometimes address the issue by requiring
contributors to open-source projects to grant users and developers of
the software a perpetual, royalty-free license to any patents that
relate to the contribution.
Now on News.com
Report:Microsoftsays open source violates 235 patents Most hated
blogger on the planet? Photos: Engineering lessons learned from Katrina
Extra: Online radio remixes the future of music
Different companies have dealt in different ways with the open-source
patent conundrum. For example, HP has taken a pro-patent stance, while
IBM, Nokia, Sun and others have granted some rights to use some of
their patents in open-source software.
The Open Invention Network remains a relatively young effort, but it
has attracted participation this year from proprietary software giant
Oracle and from Linux support seller Canonical. A company may license
the network's patents for free as long as they promise not to assert
any patent claims against those involved in the "Linux environment."
The Free Software Foundation is working on a new draft of the General
Public License, one element of which will ban partnerships such as the
one struck by Novell andMicrosoft.
The Linux geeks love to bash MSFT. Yet they love to copy the features
and funtionality of MSFT products. They only wish they had a product
half as powerful and feature rich as MSFT has. The Linux geeks are
nothing but a bunch of thieves intent on destroying the rights of
intellectual property owners.
Billary, try pulling your head out of your ass at least once a month...
Linux's kernel is based upon open-source codebases dating back to the
early days of UNIX. The user interface runs on top of the open-sourced
X-windows system. These codebases were in use before the earliest
version of Windows, which was developed *in response to* the X-windows
and the [then dominant] Macintosh operating system. It wasMicrosoft
that copied its features and GUI design from Apple (who copied it from
Xerox PARC in the late 1970's), not the other way around.
Since the open source movement is very strict about only using open
sourced codebases, and since another company (SCO) has already attempted
to sue Linux out of existence - and failed miserably - I don't think
anybody is too worried aboutMicrosoft. If they're smart, they'll co-opt
Linux (embrace and extend) rather than attempt to sue it out of existence
(which will fail). They're likely attempting a multi-pronged attack.
It its infamous lawsuit, SCO claimed that it had evidence of significant
patent infringement in the Linux codebase. As it turned out, they were
lying. They had nothing. Nada. Zilch. The case was thrown out - but
not until their stock had soared many months, making the execs and their
lawyers very rich. MSFT is very likely attempting a more expensive
version of the SCO gambit: Spew massive FUD all over the headlines, drag
the case out for a couple of years, watch your stock climb as you
threaten large Linux shops (especially recent converts) with crippling
lawsuits should they continue to resistMicrosoft'sexpensive, bloated,
insecure, bug-ridden, proprietary products. Typical monopolist tactics.
There's a reason thatMicrosofthas been likened to the alient "Borg"
from Star Trek. Resistance is futile.
Take YOUR head out of YOUR ass. MSFT isn't trying to kill Linux
Sure they are. Only a fool would suggest otherwise.
Post by Billary/2008
they're trying to defend their patents. Any owner of intellectual
property would do the same.
SCO said the same thing. And they were proven liars. So is MSFT. Let
Ballmer show us the code, or let him STFU.
Post by Billary/2008
You're so critical of the MS-OS
Where was I critical of the MS-OS (you mean Windows?) Do you specialize in
missing the point? We're not talking about Windows, we're talking aboutMicrosoft'sblatant, FUD-fueled legal attack on Linux (and more importantly,
large, commercial Linux shops).
In addition to Linux, OpenOffice.org is named as a violator of MSFT patents.
OpenOffice is simply the open source version of Sun's commercial StarOffice
productivity suite, which has been a commercial product for 13 years. If
Sun's StarOffice was in violation ofMicrosoftpatents, why isMicrosoft
only now attempting to defend themselves?
This is monopolistic behavior. Microsoftshould have been split into pieces
as a federal court originally decided. They are a menace to the
marketplace.
But, that was avoided because of the folly of history
invvolved in spliiting up AT&T. Since it turns out that
most of MS Windows is just stuff the IBM and Sun idiots
lifted from Bell Labs. Since the major meance
to the net is copyright thieves like the Washington morons
and IBM, rather Offiice products that Microsoft
makes for their idiot surfing Lodges in the woods.
Since Microsoft knows much more about
19th Century Standard Oil Company theivery that than they
do 21st Century computers or software.
Post by What Me Worry?
Post by Billary/2008
yet assholes like you aren't qualified to write a single line of code
beyond "hello world".
In Billary's Bizarro World, Linux, FreeBSD, Eclipse, the Gnu Project, the
Apache Project, X.org, OpenGL, OpenOffice.org, MySQL and many more polished,
stable, well-maintained, high-quality, usable, reliable, secure,
standards-based open source software (OSS) products were all written by
incompetents. Uh huh.
What color is the sky in Billary Bizarro World?
<desperate shrieking mercy-snipped>- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Billary/2008
2007-05-15 12:30:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by z***@netscape.net
But, that was avoided because of the folly of history
invvolved in spliiting up AT&T. Since it turns out that
most of MS Windows is just stuff the IBM and Sun idiots
lifted from Bell Labs. Since the major meance
to the net is copyright thieves like the Washington morons
and IBM, rather Offiice products that Microsoft
makes for their idiot surfing Lodges in the woods.
Since Microsoft knows much more about
19th Century Standard Oil Company theivery that than they
do 21st Century computers or software.
You don't know shit about the software industry or what drives innovation
and competition in software. Idiots like you pretend to understand , but
all you understand is the alternate reality, anti-capitalist, anti-corporate
leftist programming you were taught at a young age. You are a very good
parrot for the Undisciplined, self-taught Linux rabble.
z***@netscape.net
2007-05-15 20:17:36 UTC
Permalink
On May 15, 8:30 am, "Billary/2008" <F#
Post by Billary/2008
Post by z***@netscape.net
But, that was avoided because of the folly of history
invvolved in spliiting up AT&T. Since it turns out that
most of MS Windows is just stuff the IBM and Sun idiots
lifted from Bell Labs. Since the major meance
to the net is copyright thieves like the Washington morons
and IBM, rather Offiice products that Microsoft
makes for their idiot surfing Lodges in the woods.
Since Microsoft knows much more about
19th Century Standard Oil Company theivery that than they
do 21st Century computers or software.
You don't know shit about the software industry or what drives innovation
and competition in software.
There's not much to know about the software industry.
Since the morons are only an industry like
Bill Gates moron lake is an industry.
* It happens in dreams, in happens in caves, it happens in New
Dork,
but it ONLY happens to morons with
Bill Clinton IS-o-Matics in WASHINGTOON.




Idiots like you pretend to understand , but
Post by Billary/2008
all you understand is the alternate reality, anti-capitalist, anti-corporate
leftist programming you were taught at a young age. You are a very good
parrot for the Undisciplined, self-taught Linux rabble.
Billary/2008
2007-05-15 21:13:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by z***@netscape.net
On May 15, 8:30 am, "Billary/2008" <F#
There's not much to know about the software industry.
Since the morons are only an industry like
Bill Gates moron lake is an industry.
* It happens in dreams, in happens in caves, it happens in New
Dork,
but it ONLY happens to morons with
Bill Clinton IS-o-Matics in WASHINGTOON.
What da fuck was that? Have you ever seen such stupidity?
z***@netscape.net
2007-05-15 21:35:07 UTC
Permalink
On May 15, 5:13 pm, "Billary/2008" <F#
Post by Billary/2008
Post by z***@netscape.net
On May 15, 8:30 am, "Billary/2008" <F#
There's not much to know about the software industry.
Since the morons are only an industry like
Bill Gates moron lake is an industry.
* It happens in dreams, in happens in caves, it happens in New
Dork,
but it ONLY happens to morons with
Bill Clinton IS-o-Matics in WASHINGTOON.
What da fuck was that? Have you ever seen such stupidity?
No, I never seen it. Since only IBM IT retards
have ever seen software.
Since as is well-known throughout the Universe,
they are not only Quantum retards, they are nano-retards,
What Me Worry?
2007-05-15 21:24:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by Billary/2008
Post by z***@netscape.net
But, that was avoided because of the folly of history
invvolved in spliiting up AT&T. Since it turns out that
most of MS Windows is just stuff the IBM and Sun idiots
lifted from Bell Labs. Since the major meance
to the net is copyright thieves like the Washington morons
and IBM, rather Offiice products that Microsoft
makes for their idiot surfing Lodges in the woods.
Since Microsoft knows much more about
19th Century Standard Oil Company theivery that than they
do 21st Century computers or software.
You don't know shit about the software industry or what drives innovation
and competition in software.
I've worked on software that revolutionized computing in a disruptive way.
I can guarantee that you have used it, whether you realized it or not. (No,
I won't tell you what it is, because that would make it fairly easy to
ascertain my real identity.)

I can't think of a single product that Microsoft has ever developed that was
disruptively innovative. They're all derivative, and in some cases outright
theft of innovations or standards, twisted into proprietary clones of
formerly great software. If Microsoft touches it, it will become
proprietary, bloated, slow and unreliable almost without exception.

What disruptive innovations have you brought to computing, Billie?
Post by Billary/2008
Idiots like you pretend to understand , but all you understand is the
alternate reality, anti-capitalist, anti-corporate leftist programming you
were taught at a young age.
Wrong. Wrong. Wrong. And wrong. You're batting .000. I assure you that
(most of) the software I've worked on has been very much pro-capitalist, and
some of it has actually been licensed to Microsoft in the past. But
apparently your rightwing programming forces you get all defensive and blast
your hate spew in lieu of real discussion.

Here's a concept to blow your head to smithereens: It is possible to use,
and to even like some Microsoft products, while simultaneously *also*
liking, using and deploying *open source products.* They can even exist on
the same computer!!

Let that one sink in. Take some tranquilizers if it will help.
Post by Billary/2008
You are a very good parrot for the Undisciplined, self-taught Linux
rabble.
For a shill who claims that Microsoft is "not trying to destroy Linux", your
hateful, ignorant shrieking proves otherwise. Why is that, Billie?
Billary/2008
2007-05-15 21:57:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by What Me Worry?
Post by Billary/2008
Post by z***@netscape.net
But, that was avoided because of the folly of history
invvolved in spliiting up AT&T. Since it turns out that
most of MS Windows is just stuff the IBM and Sun idiots
lifted from Bell Labs. Since the major meance
to the net is copyright thieves like the Washington morons
and IBM, rather Offiice products that Microsoft
makes for their idiot surfing Lodges in the woods.
Since Microsoft knows much more about
19th Century Standard Oil Company theivery that than they
do 21st Century computers or software.
You don't know shit about the software industry or what drives innovation
and competition in software.
I've worked on software that revolutionized computing in a disruptive way.
I can guarantee that you have used it, whether you realized it or not.
(No, I won't tell you what it is, because that would make it fairly easy
to ascertain my real identity.)
I can't think of a single product that Microsoft has ever developed that
was disruptively innovative. They're all derivative, and in some cases
outright theft of innovations or standards, twisted into proprietary
clones of formerly great software. If Microsoft touches it, it will
become proprietary, bloated, slow and unreliable almost without exception.
What disruptive innovations have you brought to computing, Billie?
Post by Billary/2008
Idiots like you pretend to understand , but all you understand is the
alternate reality, anti-capitalist, anti-corporate leftist programming
you were taught at a young age.
Wrong. Wrong. Wrong. And wrong. You're batting .000. I assure you that
(most of) the software I've worked on has been very much pro-capitalist,
and some of it has actually been licensed to Microsoft in the past. But
apparently your rightwing programming forces you get all defensive and
blast your hate spew in lieu of real discussion.
Here's a concept to blow your head to smithereens: It is possible to use,
and to even like some Microsoft products, while simultaneously *also*
liking, using and deploying *open source products.* They can even exist
on the same computer!!
Let that one sink in. Take some tranquilizers if it will help.
Post by Billary/2008
You are a very good parrot for the Undisciplined, self-taught Linux
rabble.
For a shill who claims that Microsoft is "not trying to destroy Linux",
your hateful, ignorant shrieking proves otherwise. Why is that, Billie?
You fraud, you aren't qualified to write a line of code beyond "Hello
World". Go peddle your lies somewhere else.
Gandalf Grey
2007-05-15 22:05:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by Billary/2008
Post by What Me Worry?
Post by Billary/2008
Post by z***@netscape.net
But, that was avoided because of the folly of history
invvolved in spliiting up AT&T. Since it turns out that
most of MS Windows is just stuff the IBM and Sun idiots
lifted from Bell Labs. Since the major meance
to the net is copyright thieves like the Washington morons
and IBM, rather Offiice products that Microsoft
makes for their idiot surfing Lodges in the woods.
Since Microsoft knows much more about
19th Century Standard Oil Company theivery that than they
do 21st Century computers or software.
You don't know shit about the software industry or what drives
innovation and competition in software.
I've worked on software that revolutionized computing in a disruptive
way. I can guarantee that you have used it, whether you realized it or
not. (No, I won't tell you what it is, because that would make it fairly
easy to ascertain my real identity.)
I can't think of a single product that Microsoft has ever developed that
was disruptively innovative. They're all derivative, and in some cases
outright theft of innovations or standards, twisted into proprietary
clones of formerly great software. If Microsoft touches it, it will
become proprietary, bloated, slow and unreliable almost without exception.
What disruptive innovations have you brought to computing, Billie?
Post by Billary/2008
Idiots like you pretend to understand , but all you understand is the
alternate reality, anti-capitalist, anti-corporate leftist programming
you were taught at a young age.
Wrong. Wrong. Wrong. And wrong. You're batting .000. I assure you that
(most of) the software I've worked on has been very much pro-capitalist,
and some of it has actually been licensed to Microsoft in the past. But
apparently your rightwing programming forces you get all defensive and
blast your hate spew in lieu of real discussion.
Here's a concept to blow your head to smithereens: It is possible to
use, and to even like some Microsoft products, while simultaneously
*also* liking, using and deploying *open source products.* They can even
exist on the same computer!!
Let that one sink in. Take some tranquilizers if it will help.
Post by Billary/2008
You are a very good parrot for the Undisciplined, self-taught Linux
rabble.
For a shill who claims that Microsoft is "not trying to destroy Linux",
your hateful, ignorant shrieking proves otherwise. Why is that, Billie?
You fraud, you aren't qualified to write a line of code beyond "Hello
World".
Ever notice how everybody is a fraud but Billary?

Students of personality disorders take note.
What Me Worry?
2007-05-15 22:23:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by Billary/2008
Post by What Me Worry?
Post by Billary/2008
Post by z***@netscape.net
But, that was avoided because of the folly of history
invvolved in spliiting up AT&T. Since it turns out that
most of MS Windows is just stuff the IBM and Sun idiots
lifted from Bell Labs. Since the major meance
to the net is copyright thieves like the Washington morons
and IBM, rather Offiice products that Microsoft
makes for their idiot surfing Lodges in the woods.
Since Microsoft knows much more about
19th Century Standard Oil Company theivery that than they
do 21st Century computers or software.
You don't know shit about the software industry or what drives
innovation and competition in software.
I've worked on software that revolutionized computing in a disruptive
way. I can guarantee that you have used it, whether you realized it or
not. (No, I won't tell you what it is, because that would make it fairly
easy to ascertain my real identity.)
I can't think of a single product that Microsoft has ever developed that
was disruptively innovative. They're all derivative, and in some cases
outright theft of innovations or standards, twisted into proprietary
clones of formerly great software. If Microsoft touches it, it will
become proprietary, bloated, slow and unreliable almost without exception.
What disruptive innovations have you brought to computing, Billie?
Post by Billary/2008
Idiots like you pretend to understand , but all you understand is the
alternate reality, anti-capitalist, anti-corporate leftist programming
you were taught at a young age.
Wrong. Wrong. Wrong. And wrong. You're batting .000. I assure you that
(most of) the software I've worked on has been very much pro-capitalist,
and some of it has actually been licensed to Microsoft in the past. But
apparently your rightwing programming forces you get all defensive and
blast your hate spew in lieu of real discussion.
Here's a concept to blow your head to smithereens: It is possible to
use, and to even like some Microsoft products, while simultaneously
*also* liking, using and deploying *open source products.* They can even
exist on the same computer!!
Let that one sink in. Take some tranquilizers if it will help.
Post by Billary/2008
You are a very good parrot for the Undisciplined, self-taught Linux
rabble.
For a shill who claims that Microsoft is "not trying to destroy Linux",
your hateful, ignorant shrieking proves otherwise. Why is that, Billie?
You fraud, you aren't qualified to write a line of code beyond "Hello
World". Go peddle your lies somewhere else.
Translation: "I'm have nothing. I surrender."
3396 Dead
2007-05-15 01:53:02 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 14 May 2007 20:19:01 GMT, "Billary/2008"
Post by Billary/2008
http://www.rawstory.com/showoutarticle.php?src=http%3A%2F%2Fnews.com.com%2FReport%2BMicrosoft%2Bsays%2Bopen%2Bsource%2Bviolates%2B235%2Bpatents%2F2100-1014_3-6183437.html
Report: Microsoft says open source violates 235 patents
Top Microsoft lawyer alleges in a magazine interview that the Linux kernel
and OpenOffice.org violate hundreds of the company's patents.
By Ina Friedand Stephen Shankland
Staff Writer, CNET News.com
Published: May 13, 2007, 7:35 PM PDT
Last modified: May 13, 2007, 8:30 PM PDT
Tell us what you think about this storyTalkBackE-mail this story to a
friendE-mailView this story formatted for printingPrint Add to your
del.icio.usdel.icio.us Digg this storyDigg this
Report: Microsoft says open source violates 235 patents
update Microsoft claims that free and open-source software violates 235 of
its patents, according to a magazine report published Sunday.
In an interview with Fortune, Microsoft top lawyer Brad Smith alleges that
the Linux kernel violates 42 Microsoft patents, while its user interface
and other design elements infringe on a further 65. OpenOffice.org is
accused of infringing 45, along with 83 more in other free and open-source
programs, according to Fortune.
It is not entirely clear how Microsoft might proceed in enforcing these
patents, but the company has been encouraging large tech companies that
depend on Linux to ink patent deals, starting with its controversial pact
with Novell last November. Microsoft has also cited Linux protection
playing a role in recent patent swap deals with Samsung and Fuji Xerox.
Microsoft has also had discussions but not reached a deal with Red Hat, as
noted in the Fortune article.
Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer is also quoted in the article as saying
Microsoft's open-source competitors need to "play by the same rules as the
rest of the business."
"What's fair is fair," Ballmer told Fortune. "We live in a world where we
honor, and support the honoring of, intellectual property."
The story notes that some big tech proponents of open source have been
stockpiling intellectual property as part of the Open Invention Network,
set up in 2005 by folks like Sony, Red Hat, IBM, NEC and Philips. The
article surmises that if Microsoft were to go after open source, these
companies' combined know-how might give it some patent weapons to go after
Windows.
A Microsoft representative did not immediately respond to an e-mail
seeking comment.
Given how deeply entrenched open-source software has become in the
computing industry, taking direct legal action against the open-source
realm would be a complicated, hackle-raising undertaking for Microsoft.
Customers use open-source software widely, and many major computing
companies--IBM, Dell, Sun Microsystems, Hewlett-Packard, Motorola and
Oracle, for example--support Linux work directly.
It's not the first time that open-source patent concerns have arisen. A
2004 study by a Open Source Risk Management, a company selling insurance
against risks of using open-source software, concluded that Linux could
violate at least 283 patents, 27 of them Microsoft patents.
Patents and the open-source movement get along awkwardly at best. Patent
law gives proprietary, exclusive rights to patent holders, but open-source
programming is built on the idea of free sharing. Newer open-source
licenses sometimes address the issue by requiring contributors to
open-source projects to grant users and developers of the software a
perpetual, royalty-free license to any patents that relate to the
contribution.
Now on News.com
Report: Microsoft says open source violates 235 patents Most hated blogger
Online radio remixes the future of music
Different companies have dealt in different ways with the open-source
patent conundrum. For example, HP has taken a pro-patent stance, while
IBM, Nokia, Sun and others have granted some rights to use some of their
patents in open-source software.
The Open Invention Network remains a relatively young effort, but it has
attracted participation this year from proprietary software giant Oracle
and from Linux support seller Canonical. A company may license the
network's patents for free as long as they promise not to assert any
patent claims against those involved in the "Linux environment."
The Free Software Foundation is working on a new draft of the General
Public License, one element of which will ban partnerships such as the one
struck by Novell and Microsoft.
The Linux geeks love to bash MSFT. Yet they love to copy the features and
funtionality of MSFT products. They only wish they had a product half as
powerful and feature rich as MSFT has. The Linux geeks are nothing but a
bunch of thieves intent on destroying the rights of intellectual property
owners.
Actually, they have no use for the features and functionality, which
are usually problematical. They just want to be able to read their
files and save in the same format. Word Perfect already does, and is
a better word processor than Word.

I came to find out that Corel backed away from the Wine project, not
because it wasn't working, but because MS bought up 35% of their stock
and started applying pressure on them. Preditory business practices.

Now we have this, a suit against the Linux community allegeding
features infringing. Preditory, preditory.
--

"I am fully committed, as the administration's fully committed, to ensure that, with respect to every United States
attorney position in this country, we will have a presidentially appointed, Senate-confirmed United States attorney."

--Alberto Gonzales, committing perjury before Congress

Putsch: leading America to asymetric warfare since 2001

Not dead, in jail, or a slave? Thank a liberal!
Pay your taxes so the rich don't have to.
For the finest in liberal/leftist commentary,
http://www.zeppscommentaries.com
For news feed (free, 10-20 articles a day)
http://groups.yahoo.com/subscribe/zepps_news
For essays (donations accepted, 2 articles/week)
http://groups.yahoo.com/subscribe/zepps_essays

a.a. #2211 -- Bryan Zepp Jamieson
.
2007-05-15 02:23:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by Billary/2008
http://www.rawstory.com/showoutarticle.php?src=http%3A%2F%2Fnews.com.com%2FReport%2BMicrosoft%2Bsays%2Bopen%2Bsource%2Bviolates%2B235%2Bpatents%2F2100-1014_3-6183437.html
Report: Microsoft says open source violates 235 patents
Top Microsoft lawyer alleges in a magazine interview that the Linux kernel
and OpenOffice.org violate hundreds of the company's patents.
By Ina Friedand Stephen Shankland
Staff Writer, CNET News.com
Published: May 13, 2007, 7:35 PM PDT
Last modified: May 13, 2007, 8:30 PM PDT
Tell us what you think about this storyTalkBackE-mail this story to a
friendE-mailView this story formatted for printingPrint Add to your
del.icio.usdel.icio.us Digg this storyDigg this
Report: Microsoft says open source violates 235 patents
update Microsoft claims that free and open-source software violates 235 of
its patents, according to a magazine report published Sunday.
In an interview with Fortune, Microsoft top lawyer Brad Smith alleges that
the Linux kernel violates 42 Microsoft patents, while its user interface
and other design elements infringe on a further 65. OpenOffice.org is
accused of infringing 45, along with 83 more in other free and open-source
programs, according to Fortune.
It is not entirely clear how Microsoft might proceed in enforcing these
patents, but the company has been encouraging large tech companies that
depend on Linux to ink patent deals, starting with its controversial pact
with Novell last November. Microsoft has also cited Linux protection
playing a role in recent patent swap deals with Samsung and Fuji Xerox.
Microsoft has also had discussions but not reached a deal with Red Hat, as
noted in the Fortune article.
Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer is also quoted in the article as saying
Microsoft's open-source competitors need to "play by the same rules as the
rest of the business."
"What's fair is fair," Ballmer told Fortune. "We live in a world where we
honor, and support the honoring of, intellectual property."
The story notes that some big tech proponents of open source have been
stockpiling intellectual property as part of the Open Invention Network,
set up in 2005 by folks like Sony, Red Hat, IBM, NEC and Philips. The
article surmises that if Microsoft were to go after open source, these
companies' combined know-how might give it some patent weapons to go after
Windows.
A Microsoft representative did not immediately respond to an e-mail
seeking comment.
Given how deeply entrenched open-source software has become in the
computing industry, taking direct legal action against the open-source
realm would be a complicated, hackle-raising undertaking for Microsoft.
Customers use open-source software widely, and many major computing
companies--IBM, Dell, Sun Microsystems, Hewlett-Packard, Motorola and
Oracle, for example--support Linux work directly.
It's not the first time that open-source patent concerns have arisen. A
2004 study by a Open Source Risk Management, a company selling insurance
against risks of using open-source software, concluded that Linux could
violate at least 283 patents, 27 of them Microsoft patents.
Patents and the open-source movement get along awkwardly at best. Patent
law gives proprietary, exclusive rights to patent holders, but open-source
programming is built on the idea of free sharing. Newer open-source
licenses sometimes address the issue by requiring contributors to
open-source projects to grant users and developers of the software a
perpetual, royalty-free license to any patents that relate to the
contribution.
Now on News.com
Report: Microsoft says open source violates 235 patents Most hated blogger
Online radio remixes the future of music
Different companies have dealt in different ways with the open-source
patent conundrum. For example, HP has taken a pro-patent stance, while
IBM, Nokia, Sun and others have granted some rights to use some of their
patents in open-source software.
The Open Invention Network remains a relatively young effort, but it has
attracted participation this year from proprietary software giant Oracle
and from Linux support seller Canonical. A company may license the
network's patents for free as long as they promise not to assert any
patent claims against those involved in the "Linux environment."
The Free Software Foundation is working on a new draft of the General
Public License, one element of which will ban partnerships such as the one
struck by Novell and Microsoft.
The Linux geeks love to bash MSFT. Yet they love to copy the features and
funtionality of MSFT products. They only wish they had a product half as
powerful and feature rich as MSFT has. The Linux geeks are nothing but a
bunch of thieves intent on destroying the rights of intellectual property
owners.
ANOTHER subject where Billary doesn't know shit from Shinola demonstrated!

The perfect little right wing stooge - completely fucking programmable..
lubow
2007-05-15 04:28:08 UTC
Permalink
They only wish they had a product half as
Post by Billary/2008
powerful and feature rich as MSFT has. The Linux geeks are nothing but a
bunch of thieves intent on destroying the rights of intellectual property
owners.
May you rot in Blue Screen Hell.
--
Lubow
z***@netscape.net
2007-05-15 12:39:06 UTC
Permalink
On May 14, 4:19 pm, "Billary/2008" <F#
Post by Billary/2008
http://www.rawstory.com/showoutarticle.php?src=http%3A%2F%2Fnews.com....
Report: Microsoft says open source violates 235 patents
Top Microsoft lawyer alleges in a magazine interview that the Linux kernel
and OpenOffice.org violate hundreds of the company's patents.
By Ina Friedand Stephen Shankland
Staff Writer, CNET News.com
Published: May 13, 2007, 7:35 PM PDT
Last modified: May 13, 2007, 8:30 PM PDT
Tell us what you think about this storyTalkBackE-mail this story to a
friendE-mailView this story formatted for printingPrint Add to your
del.icio.usdel.icio.us Digg this storyDigg this
Report: Microsoft says open source violates 235 patents
update Microsoft claims that free and open-source software violates 235 of
its patents, according to a magazine report published Sunday.
In an interview with Fortune, Microsoft top lawyer Brad Smith alleges that
the Linux kernel violates 42 Microsoft patents, while its user interface
and other design elements infringe on a further 65. OpenOffice.org is
accused of infringing 45, along with 83 more in other free and open-source
programs, according to Fortune.
It is not entirely clear how Microsoft might proceed in enforcing these
patents, but the company has been encouraging large tech companies that
depend on Linux to ink patent deals, starting with its controversial pact
with Novell last November. Microsoft has also cited Linux protection
playing a role in recent patent swap deals with Samsung and Fuji Xerox.
Microsoft has also had discussions but not reached a deal with Red Hat, as
noted in the Fortune article.
Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer is also quoted in the article as saying
Microsoft's open-source competitors need to "play by the same rules as the
rest of the business."
"What's fair is fair," Ballmer told Fortune. "We live in a world where we
honor, and support the honoring of, intellectual property."
The story notes that some big tech proponents of open source have been
stockpiling intellectual property as part of the Open Invention Network,
set up in 2005 by folks like Sony, Red Hat, IBM, NEC and Philips. The
article surmises that if Microsoft were to go after open source, these
companies' combined know-how might give it some patent weapons to go after
Windows.
A Microsoft representative did not immediately respond to an e-mail
seeking comment.
Given how deeply entrenched open-source software has become in the
computing industry, taking direct legal action against the open-source
realm would be a complicated, hackle-raising undertaking for Microsoft.
Customers use open-source software widely, and many major computing
companies--IBM, Dell, Sun Microsystems, Hewlett-Packard, Motorola and
Oracle, for example--support Linux work directly.
It's not the first time that open-source patent concerns have arisen. A
2004 study by a Open Source Risk Management, a company selling insurance
against risks of using open-source software, concluded that Linux could
violate at least 283 patents, 27 of them Microsoft patents.
Patents and the open-source movement get along awkwardly at best. Patent
law gives proprietary, exclusive rights to patent holders, but open-source
programming is built on the idea of free sharing. Newer open-source
licenses sometimes address the issue by requiring contributors to
open-source projects to grant users and developers of the software a
perpetual, royalty-free license to any patents that relate to the
contribution.
Now on News.com
Report: Microsoft says open source violates 235 patents Most hated blogger
Online radio remixes the future of music
Different companies have dealt in different ways with the open-source
patent conundrum. For example, HP has taken a pro-patent stance, while
IBM, Nokia, Sun and others have granted some rights to use some of their
patents in open-source software.
The Open Invention Network remains a relatively young effort, but it has
attracted participation this year from proprietary software giant Oracle
and from Linux support seller Canonical. A company may license the
network's patents for free as long as they promise not to assert any
patent claims against those involved in the "Linux environment."
The Free Software Foundation is working on a new draft of the General
Public License, one element of which will ban partnerships such as the one
struck by Novell and Microsoft.
The Linux geeks love to bash MSFT. Yet they love to copy the features and
funtionality of MSFT products.
Since the only thing the Microsoft fools can or do make
it tools for woodsmen and ax jobs for New Dork Times
wanks, it makes no difference to either operating systems,
compilres, computers, networks, or Turing MAchines.

All morons die, but Office morons die slower!


They only wish they had a product half as
Post by Billary/2008
powerful and feature rich as MSFT has. The Linux geeks are nothing but a
bunch of thieves intent on destroying the rights of intellectual property
owners.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Yossarian
2007-05-16 06:52:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by Billary/2008
The Linux geeks love to bash MSFT. Yet they love to copy the features
and funtionality of MSFT products. They only wish they had a product
half as powerful and feature rich as MSFT has. The Linux geeks are
nothing but a bunch of thieves intent on destroying the rights of
intellectual property owners.
Oh, pishaw!!
--
--Yossarian "Disable ALL suspicious cars in the area," from a cartoon on
Adult Swim.
-- http://democrats-who-hate-hillary.blogspot.com/
.
2007-05-22 07:08:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by Yossarian
Post by Billary/2008
The Linux geeks love to bash MSFT. Yet they love to copy the features
and funtionality of MSFT products. They only wish they had a product
half as powerful and feature rich as MSFT has. The Linux geeks are
nothing but a bunch of thieves intent on destroying the rights of
intellectual property owners.
Oh, pishaw!!
Billary can't face the fact the there's a unix kernel at the base of the
XP OS..
MS has stolen every good idea they had, and their main "unique"
contributions
are strictly cosmetic. Like the pathetic little MS monkey he is, he
never misses
an opportunity to try to crap in his hand and fling it.

What a sad little man Billary is..
Loading...