Microsoft takes on the free world

[StyM]

source here (http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/2007/05/28/100033867/index.htm)

Microsoft claims that free software like Linux, which runs a big chunk of corporate America, violates 235 of its patents. It wants royalties from distributors and users. Users like you, maybe.

[Mord]

Damn greedy M$ idiots!:eek:

There are things you cannot patent :nono: . Like water - it's good for drinking (with alcohol), but no one did it... And windows - it's a GUI, idea, not an exclusive property or technology.

Damn greedy bastards! :mad:

Greets,
Abyss

[Wrench]

They will open a can of worms that will plague them forever. Don't mess with zealots they will phunk you up.

[Movieman]

Three words come to mind: Kiss my as*
Interesting article. Take the time to read the 3 pages.

[pcwhisperer]

"Microsoft counters that it is a matter of principle. "We live in a world where we honor, and support the honoring of, intellectual property," says Ballmer in an interview. FOSS patrons are going to have to "play by the same rules as the rest of the business," he insists. "What's fair is fair." "



Maybe if M$ didden't steal so much themself in the early days ( Doublespace etc...) they would not have the rigid moneysucking monopoly they have now. :banana: Hypocrits ! What else is new..

[adamsleath]

well; if m$ want to pay lots of lawyers lots of money...i think they have the cash to bully whomever they wish in the courts.

[Frank M]

How did M$ come about? Getting DOS for cheap from IBM because IBM wouldn't
be allowed to use it (monopoly lawsuits)?
So what is it they are saying? Shouldn't IBM ask for some royaltees - with
interest - for the development costs of DOS? etc. :rolleyes:

[Metroid]

It violates 235 patents

Oh great. They really want to stop the open source. Stupid company.

[nn_step]

They don't listen do they? This is going to get them to beat by IBM and Xerox for thousands of patent violations.

[K404]

People in glass houses shouldn't throw stones!

[perry_78]

stones? STONES? This ain't stones, this is :banana::banana::banana::banana:ing boulders :p:

[Order]

Wasn't the entirety of Linux based on stolen property? lol

[nn_step]

Wasn't the entirety of Linux based on stolen property? lol

nope, unless you count addition, subtraction, multiplication, and If then statements as intellectual property. :stick:

[Metroid]

So they are saying that they did invent the programming language or the maths basic.? Also the conditional statements. Oh god please help us.

[WinterHeart]

same as monsanto trying to patent pigs DNA... i mean for real ppl???

[naokaji]

what next? microsoft gonna sue the bible cause it doesnt say microsoft has created the earth? :slapass:

but yeah.... they should stop throwing stones... afterall, they sit in the glasshouse...

[Stuperman]

I really think that some of the problem is with the US patent office, they seem to issue software patents without actually looking at the code, or even trying to understand what is being patented.

I wonder how much code microsoft uses that is 'stolen' from the public domain?

[WangChung]

Up next:

God sues sheep cloners for patent infringement.

[Starscream]

I really think that some of the problem is with the US patent office, they seem to issue software patents without actually looking at the code, or even trying to understand what is being patented.

I wonder how much code microsoft uses that is 'stolen' from the public domain?

:toast:
if im correct thats how the US patent office used to run things.
you could (in the past) simply patent stuff there and they wouldnt even check if that thing was already patented or if this patent was actualy something rly new etc.

a few years back there was a big dicussion about this.
About how many stupid patents were made in the past simply to speed up stuff and decrease waiting times.
ive read once that they have hired alot of new people i hope they did that to check new patents better.
But i doubt that they r rechecking old patents.

if you got 2 patents that are exactly the same the one with the older date stamp onit should win but in reality im guessing the one with the more lawyer money wins wich is MS.

[jmilcher]

Ive just now made the switch to Open Source, and it better stay around! I realize how much money and time has been wasted on M$, it angers me!

[aMp]

A few points to temper the fire here.

First, it shouldn't surprise anyone that Linux may incorporate some patented or copyrighted code. IIRC, even Linus recently said he wished he'd scrutinized code submissions more closely in the earlier days because some used protected code. I don't know the extent to which the problem has been addressed since then.

Second, if a recent Supreme Court case is any indication, stupid patents may be harder to sustain. The Court made it easier to invalidate patents on the grounds that they are "obvious." I'd be willing to bet that a good few of Microsoft's claimed patents fall under this category, so if they tried to sue on them it wouldn't do them any good.

[xenolith]

How did M$ come about? Getting DOS for cheap from IBM because IBM wouldn't
be allowed to use it (monopoly lawsuits)?
So what is it they are saying? Shouldn't IBM ask for some royaltees - with
interest - for the development costs of DOS? etc. :rolleyes:

Actually the first "DOS" was originally licensed to MS by Tim Paterson (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tim_Paterson), and then he later sold all rights of the OS to MS. MS bought the OS for the purpose of licensing it to IBM for their first commercially offered PC. Bill Gates certainly did have a good nose for opportunities, and made the most out of them... capitalism at its finest definition.

When MS licensed MS-DOS to IBM, IBM didn't want to call it MS-DOS so basically just re-marketed it as "PC-DOS". Over time the two OSs became commercially incompatible with drivers and third party software. That's until IBM and MS both finally agreed to jointly creat OS/2, which was basically just MS-DOS 4.0.

This collaberation then dissolved when MS released Windows 3.0 and NT. MS quickly abandoned OS/2 and let IBM take over its development. However, MS was still receiving royalties from IBM.

And again, like before, the two OSs had quickly developed divergent compatiblities. But this time though it caused OS/2 to quickly fade away in the mass-market. This because MS Windows was developed much more as a open system OS - thus the common system integrator was born (like us guys) - while IBM used OS/2 as a proprietary tool to drive the sales of their own hardware systems.

Correct me if I'm wrong in my interpretation of history... but I don't see where MS ever acquired any OS exclusively developed by IBM.

[xVeinx]

A few points to temper the fire here.

First, it shouldn't surprise anyone that Linux may incorporate some patented or copyrighted code. IIRC, even Linus recently said he wished he'd scrutinized code submissions more closely in the earlier days because some used protected code. I don't know the extent to which the problem has been addressed since then.

Second, if a recent Supreme Court case is any indication, stupid patents may be harder to sustain. The Court made it easier to invalidate patents on the grounds that they are "obvious." I'd be willing to bet that a good few of Microsoft's claimed patents fall under this category, so if they tried to sue on them it wouldn't do them any good.

Good Point. In the end however, it will only take 1 patent to end the party. But then again, the original article has already pointed to the "countermeasures" set in place by IBM and others. Microsoft has already lost big on patent infringements recently, so it could stand to lose big time, especially since IBM would love nothing more than to lower Microsoft a few notches (but not end them; even IBM makes a ton of money off of windows OSs now) and probably could frolic in the fields of patents infringed on by MS.

[Vandi423]

"Microsoft counters that it is a matter of principle. "We live in a world where we honor, and support the honoring of, intellectual property," says Ballmer in an interview.

Principle? Didn't MS steal the whole Windows idea from someone else?

[nn_step]

Principle? Didn't MS steal the whole Windows idea from someone else?

well the story is that Microsoft obtained the GUI from Apple which bought the right to a GUI from Xerox

[Kanten]

If GUI infringes on copyrights, do we need to remove our eyes too? :slap:

[Brother Esau]

Just further validates my usual stance and opinion that Monopolies are evil and should be abolished !!!!

Like I keep saying the new world order is upon us and soon enough they will want to be able to monitor us 24/7 365 !!!!

[Vandi423]

well the story is that Microsoft obtained the GUI from Apple which bought the right to a GUI from Xerox

How much did alll this cost each company?

[nibble]

Yeah, this has been around for a while, all I can say is we really need software patent reform ASAP.

[ak_47_boy]

Why would M$ piss off 100% of the hacker community? Thats not a smart, at all. AT ALL.

[nn_step]

How much did alll this cost each company?

Honestly I have absolutely no clue but then again Xerox has yet to have sued anyone for using the GUI. But I know they have used it repeatedly for cross licensing purposes.

Why would M$ piss off 100% of the hacker community? Thats not a smart, at all. AT ALL.

well it does seem to be a recent trend where Microsoft seems to be making obvious mistakes but one can hope they know what they are doing.

[Kingcarcas]

I :rofl: @ M$ *eats pudding*

[Brother Esau]

Why would M$ piss off 100% of the hacker community? Thats not a smart, at all. AT ALL.

Simple people who like to be independent thinkers pose a serious threat to them.

[ahmad]

Hmmm.. that reminds me I need to go install linux on my machine.

[THE JEW (RaVeN)]

This really isn't "new" news:

http://techdirt.com/articles/20070514/013229.shtml

[merlot_14]

lmao, i guess they aren't happy with their 100$+ OS systems

[xVeinx]

lmao, i guess they aren't happy with their 100$+ OS systems

I don't believe this is a move that has as much to do with money to be made as the ability to protect a business model. Linux and other OS's have become a commodity item that is given away free with money being derived from support. Aside from this, the move to a more internet-based style of computing also challenges the standard business model of payment for software vs. advertising dollars. Microsoft's ability to adapt is being challenged, and a fight for a continuation of Microsoft's current model is being waged to preserve it's dominance in the market. When it comes to services or advertising, companies such as Google, IBM, Novell, Redhat, etc. all are a step ahead of MS, and Gates and others know it.

[Brother Esau]

It's a power play for absolute control and if open source is ruled out and outlawd that means you will have to use Vista in the days to come so that the NSA can access that backdoor and violate you're rights. Kinda defeats the purpose of the NSA'S involvement if no one wants to use it now does it? This way you will have one choice if they get their way and one choice alone which is Windows.

[lookmomnobrains]

I just got me a patent on the number 0, and now Im gone sue the word for using it. [Dave Chapelle voice] I’m rich B*tch[/Dave Chapelle voice]



[on topic mode]
I think vista isn’t doing as well as M$ hoped and now the gone act like a little child and scream someone stole there candy, while the candy wasn’t there property in the first place. [/on topic mode]

[Stuperman]

IBM is heavily invested in linux, is it not?

they would also be one of the few companies that have the resources to fight back against MS.

[Think]

Unbelievable:mad:

[Theli]

Why would M$ piss off 100% of the hacker community? Thats not a smart, at all. AT ALL.
Perhaps they are taking advice from Sony.

[nn_step]

http://www.intelligententerprise.com/channels/applications/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=199600050
Microsoft claims it is just for cross patent licensing to protect their ass

[[XC] hipno650]

well if they want to stop me form using linux on my crunchers i guess i will just have to use one XP code for more than one machine. take you pick ms it can be legal and free or can be illegal and free but coming from your pocket.:D :p:

this is unreal:(

[Orangeman]

I wonder if this has anything to do with the new Copyright laws being considered.

Microsft is NOT stupid. Going after Linux is like the RIAA going after file sharers. It's not a revenue stream, it's an expense to try to increase product revenue. And since scary sequels never match the original (SCO), what's the point?

If they can fix copyright, all the patent stuff will go away. Then again, everyone will just :banana::banana::banana::banana::banana: and moan about copyright.