[ale] [Fwd: Microsoft can't sell `Word' in US]

Richard Bronosky Richard at Bronosky.com
Thu Aug 13 23:28:50 EDT 2009


Can it really be valid to take an international stardard that you
didn't create and patten the use of it? That is basically what was
done here.

On 8/13/09, Matt Gilbert <matt at mattgilbert.net> wrote:
> Can anyone else weigh in on how this impacts software that "manipulates the
> structure and content" of XML files and/or CSS, etc? Because the way I'm
> reading it it makes about half of the software I use (and half of the
> software I write for my own use) illegal. Not that I feel like I would be a
> target for legal junk, but many programs and projects I rely on might be.
>
> There have to be plenty of legitimate reasons to sue MS that would be
> applauded, this is just absurd (and probably unenforceable anyway). If this
> is good, then it's good because the only targets would be big bad companies,
> but that puts everything else in a weird sort of black market, doesn't it?
> The picture can't be that big, can it?
>
> Matt
>
>
> On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 4:24 PM, Thompson Freeman <
> tfreeman at intel.digichem.net> wrote:
>
>> On 08/13/2009 01:09:19 PM, Michael B. Trausch wrote:
>> > On Thu, 13 Aug 2009, Jim Popovitch wrote:
>> >
>> > > On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 11:06, aaron<aaron at pd.org>
>> > wrote:
>> > >>
>> > >> While I'm an Open Source advocate who _DOES_ see the
>> > big picture,
>> > >> in this particular case I'm still going to take some
>> > gloating
>> > >> satisfaction in the justice of it.
>> > >
>> > > Who looses in this?  Microsoft?  hardly.   You wait and
>> > see... some
>> > > small business will soon be on CNN/CNBC claiming that
>> > stupid patent
>> > > enforcement laws prevented them from
>> > using/upgrading/securing MS Word
>> > > and that MS Word should never be encumbered again by
>> > threat of patents
>> > > (because after all M$ has a recent history of saying
>> > that they
>> > > wouldn't go after some obscure OS's user base....).
>> >
>> > What I hope is that they _don't_ overcome it.  I hope the
>> > patent that was
>> > enforced here is not licensed reasonably, and takes full
>> > advantage of its
>> > rights under the current patent system.  This will only
>> > serve to show how
>> > ludicris this whole bloody thing is.
>> >
>> > Imagine, if one laughable patent can cause Microsoft to
>> > become compelled
>> > to stop selling Microsoft Word, what would happen if all
>> > of the other
>> > likely lurking patents they infringe on began enforcement
>> > proceedings
>> > against them?
>> >
>> > This is the time for patent trolls to kick up their
>> > activity and go after
>> > the deep pockets.  They'll make their money, and soon
>> > enough, they'll
>> > serve no further purpose.  This will only set the stage
>> > for SCOTUS to rule
>> > most excellently on the pending case before them.
>>
>> While I can hope that SCOTUS puts a serious kibosh on the
>> patent trolls and kicks the patent system around into a
>> somewhat healthier orientation, I don't see it happening
>> _soon_, nor do I see SCOTUS making the _fundamental_
>> changes that I think need to be made (that being the job of
>> the US Congress)
>>
>> /sarcasm
>> What? Me completely distrust the legal system and the
>> practitioners working therein?
>> /endsarcasm
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Ale mailing list
>> Ale at ale.org
>> http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale
>>
>

-- 
Sent from my mobile device

.!# RichardBronosky #!.


More information about the Ale mailing list