Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > NZ Computing > [Media] Linux users owe Microsoft

Reply
Thread Tools

[Media] Linux users owe Microsoft

 
 
Anony Mouse
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-21-2006

http://www.computerworld.com.au/inde...9;fp;16;fpid;1

In comments confirming the open-source community's suspicions, Microsoft
CEO Steve Ballmer Thursday declared his belief that the Linux operating
system infringes on Microsoft's intellectual property.
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Fred Dagg
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-22-2006
On Wed, 22 Nov 2006 09:38:04 +1300, Anony Mouse <(E-Mail Removed)>
exclaimed:

>
>http://www.computerworld.com.au/inde...9;fp;16;fpid;1
>
>In comments confirming the open-source community's suspicions, Microsoft
>CEO Steve Ballmer Thursday declared his belief that the Linux operating
>system infringes on Microsoft's intellectual property.


Of course it does.

I know it's not the OS, but for example, how could OOo, which many
people call a "clone" of MS Office (albeit not a very good one), not
infringe MS's IP rights? (I use OOo as an example, as everyone knows
it).

Just because something is free doesn't mean it is without
responsibility.
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Allistar
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-22-2006
Fred Dagg wrote:

> On Wed, 22 Nov 2006 09:38:04 +1300, Anony Mouse <(E-Mail Removed)>
> exclaimed:
>
>>
>>http://www.computerworld.com.au/inde...9;fp;16;fpid;1
>>
>>In comments confirming the open-source community's suspicions, Microsoft
>>CEO Steve Ballmer Thursday declared his belief that the Linux operating
>>system infringes on Microsoft's intellectual property.

>
> Of course it does.


Can you give specific examples?

> I know it's not the OS, but for example, how could OOo, which many
> people call a "clone" of MS Office (albeit not a very good one), not
> infringe MS's IP rights? (I use OOo as an example, as everyone knows
> it).


In what way does it infringe on their IP rights?

> Just because something is free doesn't mean it is without
> responsibility.


You could say the same thing about IE7 and tabbed browsing. But you can't
(or shouldn't be able to) patent an idea like an office suite or tabbed
browsing.

Allistar.
 
Reply With Quote
 
David Goodwin
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-22-2006
On Wed, 22 Nov 2006 09:38:04 +1300, Anony Mouse <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:

>http://www.computerworld.com.au/inde...9;fp;16;fpid;1
>
>In comments confirming the open-source community's suspicions, Microsoft
>CEO Steve Ballmer Thursday declared his belief that the Linux operating
>system infringes on Microsoft's intellectual property.


Considering the number of software patents that Microsoft has it realy
wouldnt be supprising if Linux did infringe on some of them.

However, IBM has deeper pockets and more patents than Microsoft. Chair
throwing maniac that Steve Ballmer may be, I dont think he is realy
stupid enough to try and take on IBM and other large supporters of
Linux.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Fred Dagg
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-22-2006
On Wed, 22 Nov 2006 17:45:52 +1300, Allistar <(E-Mail Removed)> exclaimed:

>> I know it's not the OS, but for example, how could OOo, which many
>> people call a "clone" of MS Office (albeit not a very good one), not
>> infringe MS's IP rights? (I use OOo as an example, as everyone knows
>> it).

>
>In what way does it infringe on their IP rights?


Well, for starters, the fact that they've reverse engineered
Microsoft's Word format.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Allistar
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-22-2006
Fred Dagg wrote:

> On Wed, 22 Nov 2006 17:45:52 +1300, Allistar <(E-Mail Removed)> exclaimed:
>
>>> I know it's not the OS, but for example, how could OOo, which many
>>> people call a "clone" of MS Office (albeit not a very good one), not
>>> infringe MS's IP rights? (I use OOo as an example, as everyone knows
>>> it).

>>
>>In what way does it infringe on their IP rights?

>
> Well, for starters, the fact that they've reverse engineered
> Microsoft's Word format.


Reverse engineering isn't illegal, unless it circumvents security under the
DMCA, which reverse engineering the .doc format doesn't do. I don't think
Microsoft have a patent on a format (can formats be patented?)

Allistar.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Fred Dagg
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-22-2006
On Wed, 22 Nov 2006 19:44:35 +1300, Allistar <(E-Mail Removed)> exclaimed:

>Fred Dagg wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 22 Nov 2006 17:45:52 +1300, Allistar <(E-Mail Removed)> exclaimed:
>>
>>>> I know it's not the OS, but for example, how could OOo, which many
>>>> people call a "clone" of MS Office (albeit not a very good one), not
>>>> infringe MS's IP rights? (I use OOo as an example, as everyone knows
>>>> it).
>>>
>>>In what way does it infringe on their IP rights?

>>
>> Well, for starters, the fact that they've reverse engineered
>> Microsoft's Word format.

>
>Reverse engineering isn't illegal, unless it circumvents security under the
>DMCA, which reverse engineering the .doc format doesn't do. I don't think
>Microsoft have a patent on a format (can formats be patented?)


It is their Intellectual Property.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Lawrence D'Oliveiro
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-22-2006
In message <(E-Mail Removed)>, Allistar wrote:

> Reverse engineering isn't illegal, unless it circumvents security under
> the DMCA, which reverse engineering the .doc format doesn't do. I don't
> think Microsoft have a patent on a format (can formats be patented?)


In the US, it seems, any bloody thing is patentable. Someone even got a
patent on a method of tying shoelaces
<http://www.fieggen.com/shoelace/doublehelixlacing.htm>.
 
Reply With Quote
 
GraB
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-22-2006
On Wed, 22 Nov 2006 19:50:25 +1300, Fred Dagg <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:

>On Wed, 22 Nov 2006 19:44:35 +1300, Allistar <(E-Mail Removed)> exclaimed:
>
>>Fred Dagg wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, 22 Nov 2006 17:45:52 +1300, Allistar <(E-Mail Removed)> exclaimed:
>>>
>>>>> I know it's not the OS, but for example, how could OOo, which many
>>>>> people call a "clone" of MS Office (albeit not a very good one), not
>>>>> infringe MS's IP rights? (I use OOo as an example, as everyone knows
>>>>> it).
>>>>
>>>>In what way does it infringe on their IP rights?
>>>
>>> Well, for starters, the fact that they've reverse engineered
>>> Microsoft's Word format.

>>
>>Reverse engineering isn't illegal, unless it circumvents security under the
>>DMCA, which reverse engineering the .doc format doesn't do. I don't think
>>Microsoft have a patent on a format (can formats be patented?)

>
>It is their Intellectual Property.


Has MS ever used technology belonging to others before?


 
Reply With Quote
 
Earl Grey
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-22-2006
Fred Dagg wrote:
> On Wed, 22 Nov 2006 19:44:35 +1300, Allistar <(E-Mail Removed)> exclaimed:
>
>> Fred Dagg wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, 22 Nov 2006 17:45:52 +1300, Allistar <(E-Mail Removed)> exclaimed:
>>>
>>>>> I know it's not the OS, but for example, how could OOo, which many
>>>>> people call a "clone" of MS Office (albeit not a very good one), not
>>>>> infringe MS's IP rights? (I use OOo as an example, as everyone knows
>>>>> it).
>>>> In what way does it infringe on their IP rights?
>>> Well, for starters, the fact that they've reverse engineered
>>> Microsoft's Word format.

>> Reverse engineering isn't illegal, unless it circumvents security under the
>> DMCA, which reverse engineering the .doc format doesn't do. I don't think
>> Microsoft have a patent on a format (can formats be patented?)

>
> It is their Intellectual Property.


But not exclusively theirs.
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
I owe the IRS $7200 philo Computer Support 2 06-09-2006 11:22 PM
microsoft.public.certification, microsoft.public.cert.exam.mcsa, microsoft.public.cert.exam.mcad, microsoft.public.cert.exam.mcse, microsoft.public.cert.exam.mcsd realexxams@yahoo.com Microsoft Certification 0 05-10-2006 02:35 PM
I guess I owe this group a *lot* of on-topic messages. Unclaimed Mysteries Digital Photography 8 05-18-2005 12:34 PM
microsoft.public.dotnet.faqs,microsoft.public.dotnet.framework,microsoft.public.dotnet.framework.windowsforms,microsoft.public.dotnet.general,microsoft.public.dotnet.languages.vb Charles A. Lackman ASP .Net 1 12-08-2004 07:08 PM
Many owe an apology to George Preddy Charles Schuler Digital Photography 12 05-27-2004 01:00 AM



Advertisments