Home » The PARIS Forums » PARIS: Main » This could get interesting
|
|
| Re: This could get interesting [message #84529 is a reply to message #84528] |
Mon, 14 May 2007 09:20   |
![Deej [4] is currently offline](/theme/PARIS_Forum_Template/images/offline.png "Deej [4] is currently offline")
Deej [4]
Messages: 1292
Registered: January 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
"TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote in message news:46488bce$1@linux...
>
> http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/2007/ 05/28/100033867/index.htm?section=money_latest
>
> TCB
See......I told you you were using pirated software, but did you
listen???.....NOOOOooooooooo!!! Now, that, if you'll just start sending me
that $100.00 licensing fee, I'll see that it gets to the *right people*.
;o)
Notice to Users: This is a Federal computer system and is the property of
the United States Government. It is for authorized use only. Users
(authorized or unauthorized) have no explicit or implicit expectation of
privacy.
Any or all uses of this system and all files on this system may be
intercepted, monitored, recorded, copied, audited, inspected, and disclosed
to authorized site, Department of Energy, and law enforcement personnel, as
well as authorized officials of other agencies, both domestic and foreign.
By using this system, the user consents to such interception, monitoring,
recording, copying, auditing, inspection, and disclosure at the discretion
of authorized site or Department of Energy personnel.
Unauthorized or improper use of this system may result in administrative
disciplinary action and civil and criminal penalties. By continuing to use
this system you indicate your awareness of and consent to these terms and
conditions of use. LOG OFF IMMEDIATELY if you do not agree to the conditions
stated in this warning.
Policy and Disclaimers
Policy Statement: The Los Alamos National Laboratory strongly supports
academic freedom and a researcher's right to publish; therefore, the
Laboratory as an institution does not endorse the viewpoint of a publication
or guarantee its technical correctness.
Disclaimer of Liability: With respect to documents available from this
server, neither the United States Government nor the University of
California nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or
implied, including the warranties of merchantability and fitness for a
particular purpose, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the
accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus,
product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe
privately owned rights.
Disclaimer of Endorsement: Reference herein to any specific commercial
products, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or
otherwise, does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement,
recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or the
University of California. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein
do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or
the University of California, and shall not be used for advertising or
product endorsement purposes.
Privacy Notice
Visitors to LANL Web sites have no explicit or implicit expectation of
privacy. The Laboratory uses software programs to monitor network traffic to
identify unauthorized attempts to upload or change information or otherwise
cause damage. Any or all visits to LANL Web sites are subject to the
Conditions of Use.
We collect no personal information about you when you visit a LANL Web site,
except where otherwise stated, unless you choose to provide this information
to us. However, we collect and store certain information automatically:
a.. the Internet Protocol (IP) address and the name of the host from which
you access the Internet (i.e. 123.456.789.012), whether yours individually
or provided as a proxy by your Internet Service Provider (ISP),
b.. the browser type and version you are using to access the site,
c.. the operating system and version you are running on your machine,
d.. the date and time you access our site,
e.. the pages you peruse (recorded by the text and graphics files that
compose that page),
f.. and, the Internet address of the Web site from which you linked
directly to our site.
We use the summary statistics to help us make our site more useful to
visitors (such as assessing what information is of most and least interest
to visitors) and for other purposes such as determining the site's technical
design specifications and identifying system performance or problem areas.?
This information is NOT shared with anyone beyond the support staff for LANL
Web sites, except as required for site security purposes, to ensure that
LANL Web sites remain available to all users, and when required by law
enforcement investigation. We use the information only as a source of
anonymous statistical information, and no other attempts are made to
identify individual users or their usage habits.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: This could get interesting [message #84590 is a reply to message #84528] |
Mon, 14 May 2007 21:53 |
excelav
Messages: 2130
Registered: July 2005
Location: Metro Detroit
|
Senior Member |
|
|
MS stomps on anybody or anything that appears to be a threat.
When Gates ran down to Mexico, Central America and South America to head
off the free computers with MS bribes, he just showed the world again what
a worm he is. Slime!
They have stolen from many, and then sue others for doing the same, thats
so hypocritical! They have never had a real serious consequence for the
things they have done, thanks to political influence. They got nothing more
that a slap on the wrist. Now they have set the standards for other companies
to follow, and other companies are following suit. Nothing but greed will
rule the day.
The killing of technologies, corrupting good technologies, crappy products,
call centers in India, monopolies, government bribes and favoritism, corporate
espionage, and out right theft, all make for a nice world.
It's hard for me to support a company like MS.
Speaking of call centers in India, HP is really starting to suck. Their
newer drivers for PC and Mac both suck. I hate any software that insists
on getting in the way when I'm trying to get some work done. Talk about
spyware virus-ware, It's a pain to turn off, and uninstalling HP software
is a PITA to, it tries to keep showing up and connecting to the mother ship,
reminds me of MS.
I liked the HP video. I thought it was a creative way for our boys to get
in their mandatory target practice.
Here's a little SUN shine for HP: http://youtube.com/watch?v=YOnRJi9QJr8&mode=related& search=
While Americans are out of work, people should let these companies know that
we don't appreciate Indian call centers. It really is too bad, HP is not
the company it once was.
I still use MS and HP products, but for not too much longer. They don't
need anymore of my money anyways.
"TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote:
>
> http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/2007/ 05/28/100033867/index.htm?section=money_latest
>
>TCB
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: This could get interesting [message #84614 is a reply to message #84549] |
Tue, 15 May 2007 07:37 |
TCB
Messages: 1261
Registered: July 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
The thing is, though, that M$oft isn't suing anyone. What they're saying is,
'Linux infringes on 235 patents. We won't tell you which ones, but they do,
just trust us.' Then they are going to their big corporate (and maybe educational,
I'm not sure) customers and saying, 'If you have linux in your server room
or even if your geeks use it on their desktops, you're infringing on our
patents. However, we're reasonable people and realize you might need more
than one platform in your backline. So you can either move your linux servers
over to our stuff or you can pay us a licensing fee to indemnify you on the
patent infringement.'
The reason they're going this way is if they were to litigate, say sue Red
Hat because they're publicly traded and have a balance sheet, then they have
to come out and say exactly what's being infringed upon. And it's probably
stupid shit like having a menu that can be used to open a file. SCO did something
similar, saying that IBM had used SCO code in their linux work and took them
to court where IBM has so brutally cleaned their clocks that M$oft isn't
going that route unless they have no choice.
So it's not something being litigated now, it's a classic shakedown. 'Good
Morning Mr. Don. My name Vinnie 'the Firestarter' Corleone. I was just noticing
your lovely house and all of the wood it happens to have in it. I'm sure
you have insurance but you have no idea how inconvenient it is when your
house catches on fire, it'd a terrible strain on you and your lovely family.
So I was thinking, my brother is in the fire department, and he only lives
a few doors down, for only $150 per week I'm sure he'd be happy to keep an
extra close eye on your lovely house and be sure nothing happened to it.'
All of which to me shows how hollow M$oft is becoming. While companies like
Google are pressing out and expanding on what you can do with your computer,
M$oft is reduced to crudely shaking down their own customers. Not much of
a business model.
TCB
"DC" <dc@spammersinredmond.com> wrote:
>
>You almost cannot overstate the potential impact of this
>litigation on the shape and future of the internet, and how
>business is conducted. In a way, it would be like the railroad
>barons of the 19th century suing anyone who used a wheel,
>axles, and brakes, for infringement.
>
>This is really important, and it is really important that MS loses...
>
>DC
>
>
>"TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote:
>>
>> http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/2007/ 05/28/100033867/index.htm?section=money_latest
>>
>>TCB
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: This could get interesting [message #84617 is a reply to message #84614] |
Tue, 15 May 2007 08:50 |
excelav
Messages: 2130
Registered: July 2005
Location: Metro Detroit
|
Senior Member |
|
|
I totally agree. They are the kings of unethical business practices. I bet
they start suing the small guys that can't fight them. Any chance to sue
and win is like blood in the water to there legal department. After all,
they are entitled.
"TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote:
>
>The thing is, though, that M$oft isn't suing anyone. What they're saying
is,
>'Linux infringes on 235 patents. We won't tell you which ones, but they
do,
>just trust us.' Then they are going to their big corporate (and maybe educational,
>I'm not sure) customers and saying, 'If you have linux in your server room
>or even if your geeks use it on their desktops, you're infringing on our
>patents. However, we're reasonable people and realize you might need more
>than one platform in your backline. So you can either move your linux servers
>over to our stuff or you can pay us a licensing fee to indemnify you on
the
>patent infringement.'
>
>The reason they're going this way is if they were to litigate, say sue Red
>Hat because they're publicly traded and have a balance sheet, then they
have
>to come out and say exactly what's being infringed upon. And it's probably
>stupid shit like having a menu that can be used to open a file. SCO did
something
>similar, saying that IBM had used SCO code in their linux work and took
them
>to court where IBM has so brutally cleaned their clocks that M$oft isn't
>going that route unless they have no choice.
>
>So it's not something being litigated now, it's a classic shakedown. 'Good
>Morning Mr. Don. My name Vinnie 'the Firestarter' Corleone. I was just noticing
>your lovely house and all of the wood it happens to have in it. I'm sure
>you have insurance but you have no idea how inconvenient it is when your
>house catches on fire, it'd a terrible strain on you and your lovely family.
>So I was thinking, my brother is in the fire department, and he only lives
>a few doors down, for only $150 per week I'm sure he'd be happy to keep
an
>extra close eye on your lovely house and be sure nothing happened to it.'
>
>All of which to me shows how hollow M$oft is becoming. While companies like
>Google are pressing out and expanding on what you can do with your computer,
>M$oft is reduced to crudely shaking down their own customers. Not much of
>a business model.
>
>TCB
>
>"DC" <dc@spammersinredmond.com> wrote:
>>
>>You almost cannot overstate the potential impact of this
>>litigation on the shape and future of the internet, and how
>>business is conducted. In a way, it would be like the railroad
>>barons of the 19th century suing anyone who used a wheel,
>>axles, and brakes, for infringement.
>>
>>This is really important, and it is really important that MS loses...
>>
>>DC
>>
>>
>>"TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/2007/ 05/28/100033867/index.htm?section=money_latest
>>>
>>>TCB
>>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: This could get interesting [message #84619 is a reply to message #84617] |
Tue, 15 May 2007 11:02 |
TCB
Messages: 1261
Registered: July 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Read what I said more closely, James. I don't think they'll sue anyone, because
if they do then they patents can be contested/dismissed or worked around.
The free software community is very accustomed to such situations and has
done so before lots of times. They have nothing to gain from suing and everything
to lose, but lots to gain from threatening to sue.
Contrary to popular opinion IP rights are central to free software. Without
them the GPL (or the Debian license or whatever) becomes unenforceable. Most
free software people question software patents in general, but the enforcement
of copyright is the only thing that allows the GPL to have teeth.
TCB
"James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>I totally agree. They are the kings of unethical business practices. I
bet
>they start suing the small guys that can't fight them. Any chance to sue
>and win is like blood in the water to there legal department. After all,
>they are entitled.
>
>"TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote:
>>
>>The thing is, though, that M$oft isn't suing anyone. What they're saying
>is,
>>'Linux infringes on 235 patents. We won't tell you which ones, but they
>do,
>>just trust us.' Then they are going to their big corporate (and maybe educational,
>>I'm not sure) customers and saying, 'If you have linux in your server room
>>or even if your geeks use it on their desktops, you're infringing on our
>>patents. However, we're reasonable people and realize you might need more
>>than one platform in your backline. So you can either move your linux servers
>>over to our stuff or you can pay us a licensing fee to indemnify you on
>the
>>patent infringement.'
>>
>>The reason they're going this way is if they were to litigate, say sue
Red
>>Hat because they're publicly traded and have a balance sheet, then they
>have
>>to come out and say exactly what's being infringed upon. And it's probably
>>stupid shit like having a menu that can be used to open a file. SCO did
>something
>>similar, saying that IBM had used SCO code in their linux work and took
>them
>>to court where IBM has so brutally cleaned their clocks that M$oft isn't
>>going that route unless they have no choice.
>>
>>So it's not something being litigated now, it's a classic shakedown. 'Good
>>Morning Mr. Don. My name Vinnie 'the Firestarter' Corleone. I was just
noticing
>>your lovely house and all of the wood it happens to have in it. I'm sure
>>you have insurance but you have no idea how inconvenient it is when your
>>house catches on fire, it'd a terrible strain on you and your lovely family.
>>So I was thinking, my brother is in the fire department, and he only lives
>>a few doors down, for only $150 per week I'm sure he'd be happy to keep
>an
>>extra close eye on your lovely house and be sure nothing happened to it.'
>>
>>All of which to me shows how hollow M$oft is becoming. While companies
like
>>Google are pressing out and expanding on what you can do with your computer,
>>M$oft is reduced to crudely shaking down their own customers. Not much
of
>>a business model.
>>
>>TCB
>>
>>"DC" <dc@spammersinredmond.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>You almost cannot overstate the potential impact of this
>>>litigation on the shape and future of the internet, and how
>>>business is conducted. In a way, it would be like the railroad
>>>barons of the 19th century suing anyone who used a wheel,
>>>axles, and brakes, for infringement.
>>>
>>>This is really important, and it is really important that MS loses...
>>>
>>>DC
>>>
>>>
>>>"TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/2007/ 05/28/100033867/index.htm?section=money_latest
>>>>
>>>>TCB
>>>
>>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: This could get interesting [message #84625 is a reply to message #84619] |
Tue, 15 May 2007 12:25 |
excelav
Messages: 2130
Registered: July 2005
Location: Metro Detroit
|
Senior Member |
|
|
More MS fans!
http://www.macworld.co.uk/business/news/index.cfm?newsid=180 34
"TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote:
>
>Read what I said more closely, James. I don't think they'll sue anyone,
because
>if they do then they patents can be contested/dismissed or worked around.
>The free software community is very accustomed to such situations and has
>done so before lots of times. They have nothing to gain from suing and everything
>to lose, but lots to gain from threatening to sue.
>
>Contrary to popular opinion IP rights are central to free software. Without
>them the GPL (or the Debian license or whatever) becomes unenforceable.
Most
>free software people question software patents in general, but the enforcement
>of copyright is the only thing that allows the GPL to have teeth.
>
>TCB
>
>"James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>I totally agree. They are the kings of unethical business practices.
I
>bet
>>they start suing the small guys that can't fight them. Any chance to sue
>>and win is like blood in the water to there legal department. After all,
>>they are entitled.
>>
>>"TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>The thing is, though, that M$oft isn't suing anyone. What they're saying
>>is,
>>>'Linux infringes on 235 patents. We won't tell you which ones, but they
>>do,
>>>just trust us.' Then they are going to their big corporate (and maybe
educational,
>>>I'm not sure) customers and saying, 'If you have linux in your server
room
>>>or even if your geeks use it on their desktops, you're infringing on our
>>>patents. However, we're reasonable people and realize you might need more
>>>than one platform in your backline. So you can either move your linux
servers
>>>over to our stuff or you can pay us a licensing fee to indemnify you on
>>the
>>>patent infringement.'
>>>
>>>The reason they're going this way is if they were to litigate, say sue
>Red
>>>Hat because they're publicly traded and have a balance sheet, then they
>>have
>>>to come out and say exactly what's being infringed upon. And it's probably
>>>stupid shit like having a menu that can be used to open a file. SCO did
>>something
>>>similar, saying that IBM had used SCO code in their linux work and took
>>them
>>>to court where IBM has so brutally cleaned their clocks that M$oft isn't
>>>going that route unless they have no choice.
>>>
>>>So it's not something being litigated now, it's a classic shakedown. 'Good
>>>Morning Mr. Don. My name Vinnie 'the Firestarter' Corleone. I was just
>noticing
>>>your lovely house and all of the wood it happens to have in it. I'm sure
>>>you have insurance but you have no idea how inconvenient it is when your
>>>house catches on fire, it'd a terrible strain on you and your lovely family.
>>>So I was thinking, my brother is in the fire department, and he only lives
>>>a few doors down, for only $150 per week I'm sure he'd be happy to keep
>>an
>>>extra close eye on your lovely house and be sure nothing happened to it.'
>>>
>>>All of which to me shows how hollow M$oft is becoming. While companies
>like
>>>Google are pressing out and expanding on what you can do with your computer,
>>>M$oft is reduced to crudely shaking down their own customers. Not much
>of
>>>a business model.
>>>
>>>TCB
>>>
>>>"DC" <dc@spammersinredmond.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>You almost cannot overstate the potential impact of this
>>>>litigation on the shape and future of the internet, and how
>>>>business is conducted. In a way, it would be like the railroad
>>>>barons of the 19th century suing anyone who used a wheel,
>>>>axles, and brakes, for infringement.
>>>>
>>>>This is really important, and it is really important that MS loses...
>>>>
>>>>DC
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>"TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/2007/ 05/28/100033867/index.htm?section=money_latest
>>>>>
>>>>>TCB
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: This could get interesting [message #84626 is a reply to message #84614] |
Tue, 15 May 2007 13:50 |
TCB
Messages: 1261
Registered: July 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
I realize this is tooting my own horn a bit, but here's a link to what Linus
has to say, which is damn to close to what I wrote before I read this piece.
http://www.informationweek.com/news/showArticle.jhtml?articl eID=199600443
TCB
"TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote:
>
>The thing is, though, that M$oft isn't suing anyone. What they're saying
is,
>'Linux infringes on 235 patents. We won't tell you which ones, but they
do,
>just trust us.' Then they are going to their big corporate (and maybe educational,
>I'm not sure) customers and saying, 'If you have linux in your server room
>or even if your geeks use it on their desktops, you're infringing on our
>patents. However, we're reasonable people and realize you might need more
>than one platform in your backline. So you can either move your linux servers
>over to our stuff or you can pay us a licensing fee to indemnify you on
the
>patent infringement.'
>
>The reason they're going this way is if they were to litigate, say sue Red
>Hat because they're publicly traded and have a balance sheet, then they
have
>to come out and say exactly what's being infringed upon. And it's probably
>stupid shit like having a menu that can be used to open a file. SCO did
something
>similar, saying that IBM had used SCO code in their linux work and took
them
>to court where IBM has so brutally cleaned their clocks that M$oft isn't
>going that route unless they have no choice.
>
>So it's not something being litigated now, it's a classic shakedown. 'Good
>Morning Mr. Don. My name Vinnie 'the Firestarter' Corleone. I was just noticing
>your lovely house and all of the wood it happens to have in it. I'm sure
>you have insurance but you have no idea how inconvenient it is when your
>house catches on fire, it'd a terrible strain on you and your lovely family.
>So I was thinking, my brother is in the fire department, and he only lives
>a few doors down, for only $150 per week I'm sure he'd be happy to keep
an
>extra close eye on your lovely house and be sure nothing happened to it.'
>
>All of which to me shows how hollow M$oft is becoming. While companies like
>Google are pressing out and expanding on what you can do with your computer,
>M$oft is reduced to crudely shaking down their own customers. Not much of
>a business model.
>
>TCB
>
>"DC" <dc@spammersinredmond.com> wrote:
>>
>>You almost cannot overstate the potential impact of this
>>litigation on the shape and future of the internet, and how
>>business is conducted. In a way, it would be like the railroad
>>barons of the 19th century suing anyone who used a wheel,
>>axles, and brakes, for infringement.
>>
>>This is really important, and it is really important that MS loses...
>>
>>DC
>>
>>
>>"TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/2007/ 05/28/100033867/index.htm?section=money_latest
>>>
>>>TCB
>>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: This could get interesting [message #84632 is a reply to message #84626] |
Tue, 15 May 2007 17:47 |
chuck duffy
Messages: 453
Registered: July 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Thad,
I have to say that I am dismayed this has come to pass, but I guess it was
inevitable. They (ms) laughed off/ignored free software as long as possible.
That's the first strategy of the entrenched, pretend there is no alternative.
It's not possible to ignore free software anymore.
Chuck
"TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote:
>
>I realize this is tooting my own horn a bit, but here's a link to what Linus
>has to say, which is damn to close to what I wrote before I read this piece.
>
>
> http://www.informationweek.com/news/showArticle.jhtml?articl eID=199600443
>
>TCB
>
>"TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote:
>>
>>The thing is, though, that M$oft isn't suing anyone. What they're saying
>is,
>>'Linux infringes on 235 patents. We won't tell you which ones, but they
>do,
>>just trust us.' Then they are going to their big corporate (and maybe educational,
>>I'm not sure) customers and saying, 'If you have linux in your server room
>>or even if your geeks use it on their desktops, you're infringing on our
>>patents. However, we're reasonable people and realize you might need more
>>than one platform in your backline. So you can either move your linux servers
>>over to our stuff or you can pay us a licensing fee to indemnify you on
>the
>>patent infringement.'
>>
>>The reason they're going this way is if they were to litigate, say sue
Red
>>Hat because they're publicly traded and have a balance sheet, then they
>have
>>to come out and say exactly what's being infringed upon. And it's probably
>>stupid shit like having a menu that can be used to open a file. SCO did
>something
>>similar, saying that IBM had used SCO code in their linux work and took
>them
>>to court where IBM has so brutally cleaned their clocks that M$oft isn't
>>going that route unless they have no choice.
>>
>>So it's not something being litigated now, it's a classic shakedown. 'Good
>>Morning Mr. Don. My name Vinnie 'the Firestarter' Corleone. I was just
noticing
>>your lovely house and all of the wood it happens to have in it. I'm sure
>>you have insurance but you have no idea how inconvenient it is when your
>>house catches on fire, it'd a terrible strain on you and your lovely family.
>>So I was thinking, my brother is in the fire department, and he only lives
>>a few doors down, for only $150 per week I'm sure he'd be happy to keep
>an
>>extra close eye on your lovely house and be sure nothing happened to it.'
>>
>>All of which to me shows how hollow M$oft is becoming. While companies
like
>>Google are pressing out and expanding on what you can do with your computer,
>>M$oft is reduced to crudely shaking down their own customers. Not much
of
>>a business model.
>>
>>TCB
>>
>>"DC" <dc@spammersinredmond.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>You almost cannot overstate the potential impact of this
>>>litigation on the shape and future of the internet, and how
>>>business is conducted. In a way, it would be like the railroad
>>>barons of the 19th century suing anyone who used a wheel,
>>>axles, and brakes, for infringement.
>>>
>>>This is really important, and it is really important that MS loses...
>>>
>>>DC
>>>
>>>
>>>"TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/2007/ 05/28/100033867/index.htm?section=money_latest
>>>>
>>>>TCB
>>>
>>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: This could get interesting [message #84649 is a reply to message #84632] |
Wed, 16 May 2007 06:37 |
TCB
Messages: 1261
Registered: July 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
I agree, Chuck, but I think the only danger is to other corporate entities
having to pay MSoft some money. And in the long run that's going to hurt
MSoft more than anyone else. It will make them seem like an untrustworthy,
unpredictable partner and will push even the big boys to reconsider how much
they rely on them.
TCB
"chuck duffy" <c@c.com> wrote:
>
>Thad,
>
>I have to say that I am dismayed this has come to pass, but I guess it was
>inevitable. They (ms) laughed off/ignored free software as long as possible.
>That's the first strategy of the entrenched, pretend there is no alternative.
>It's not possible to ignore free software anymore.
>
>Chuck
>"TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote:
>>
>>I realize this is tooting my own horn a bit, but here's a link to what
Linus
>>has to say, which is damn to close to what I wrote before I read this piece.
>>
>>
>> http://www.informationweek.com/news/showArticle.jhtml?articl eID=199600443
>>
>>TCB
>>
>>"TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>The thing is, though, that M$oft isn't suing anyone. What they're saying
>>is,
>>>'Linux infringes on 235 patents. We won't tell you which ones, but they
>>do,
>>>just trust us.' Then they are going to their big corporate (and maybe
educational,
>>>I'm not sure) customers and saying, 'If you have linux in your server
room
>>>or even if your geeks use it on their desktops, you're infringing on our
>>>patents. However, we're reasonable people and realize you might need more
>>>than one platform in your backline. So you can either move your linux
servers
>>>over to our stuff or you can pay us a licensing fee to indemnify you on
>>the
>>>patent infringement.'
>>>
>>>The reason they're going this way is if they were to litigate, say sue
>Red
>>>Hat because they're publicly traded and have a balance sheet, then they
>>have
>>>to come out and say exactly what's being infringed upon. And it's probably
>>>stupid shit like having a menu that can be used to open a file. SCO did
>>something
>>>similar, saying that IBM had used SCO code in their linux work and took
>>them
>>>to court where IBM has so brutally cleaned their clocks that M$oft isn't
>>>going that route unless they have no choice.
>>>
>>>So it's not something being litigated now, it's a classic shakedown. 'Good
>>>Morning Mr. Don. My name Vinnie 'the Firestarter' Corleone. I was just
>noticing
>>>your lovely house and all of the wood it happens to have in it. I'm sure
>>>you have insurance but you have no idea how inconvenient it is when your
>>>house catches on fire, it'd a terrible strain on you and your lovely family.
>>>So I was thinking, my brother is in the fire department, and he only lives
>>>a few doors down, for only $150 per week I'm sure he'd be happy to keep
>>an
>>>extra close eye on your lovely house and be sure nothing happened to it.'
>>>
>>>All of which to me shows how hollow M$oft is becoming. While companies
>like
>>>Google are pressing out and expanding on what you can do with your computer,
>>>M$oft is reduced to crudely shaking down their own customers. Not much
>of
>>>a business model.
>>>
>>>TCB
>>>
>>>"DC" <dc@spammersinredmond.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>You almost cannot overstate the potential impact of this
>>>>litigation on the shape and future of the internet, and how
>>>>business is conducted. In a way, it would be like the railroad
>>>>barons of the 19th century suing anyone who used a wheel,
>>>>axles, and brakes, for infringement.
>>>>
>>>>This is really important, and it is really important that MS loses...
>>>>
>>>>DC
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>"TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/2007/ 05/28/100033867/index.htm?section=money_latest
>>>>>
>>>>>TCB
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Mon Dec 16 13:50:39 PST 2024
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.01661 seconds
|
The PARIS Forums
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
