On Monday 27 November 2006 21:49, Robert Snyder wrote:
> On 11/27/06, Rich Morgan <rmorgan@heavysystems.com> wrote:
> > On Mon, November 27, 2006 1:04 pm, Robert Snyder wrote:
> > > They disagree because they cant see past the stupid IP issues.
> >
> > Robert, these "stupid IP issues" could seriously hurt Linux by forcing a
> > removal or crippling of features to comply with Microsoft's IP. At the
> > very best, if the claims are true, it could developmentally set the Linux
> > kernel back while parts are re-written.
>
> If they are in violation then they have real issues. What are they doing
> with MS code in the first place... Assuming they are in violation of ip
> rights.
A clarification is in place. People obviously does not have MS code either as
it is not open source. IP is made up of methods of doing this, not programs.
This means if I have a patent on saving from a computer to disk, then anyway
you save to disk you would be in violation of my IP.
So you see it's easy to be in violation by simply doing normal coding.
Actually a few years ago (according to Stallman) a project discovered a
couple of hundred IP of those just in the kernel.
So it's not a matter of open source developers stealing code, but doing normal
development.
On the other hand being that MS have the track record they do, it's very
likely that they are using our code.
> As a person with direct friends who work at MS the mood in the office is
> not kill linux. They
> happy that they are getting linux desktops and they stop lying about not
> knowing what firefox is or what linux is. They always knew and some even
> used them in the office
It's a bit naive to think that 1) employees are involved in high level
strategies, plans and directions of the company. That obviously management
need to keep an eye on violations of the antitrust laws. (We know that a few
years back Ballmer made the statment about having future plans to deal with
the Linux problem. Before the SCO case came to.)
2) Meanwhile if they can get deeply involved with Linux they will learn how to
beat it.
3) The track record in terms of how they dealt with competition in a non
competitive fashion, over and over and ...
Never mind the company's stated goal of being on every computer. Every license
agreement made by MS which all puts Linux developers at risk of not being
able to continue developing under Linux or any MS competitor.
All their "open source" licenses which are all useless as written. (Giving you
the right to do modify with an app, but not able to run it on the O/S as it
won't let modified code run, for example.)
People will automatically be excited to work on Linux as it has these plus
points we all know about. Indeed in the original Halloween Document (where a
MS programmer researched Linux) the programmer said that unlike windows,
under Linux it was so easy to write drivers that he just had to write a few.
He was so enthralled about working on Linux.
> but this whole ms trying to kill linux crap goes
> back to the " we hate microsoft troll flame mentality"
I find it surprising that you think MS is not trying to stop Linux when the
top executives have said they are in public. Never mind all their actions to
do so. Like lobbying Congress a few years back. There is so much overwhelming
evidence...
--Steve Szmidt
"To enjoy the right of political self-government, men must be capable of personal self-government - the virtue of self-control. A people without decency cannot be secure in its liberty. From the Declaration Principles ----------------------------------------------------------------------- This list is provided as an unmoderated internet service by Networked Knowledge Systems (NKS). Views and opinions expressed in messages posted are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of NKS or any of its employees.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Fri Aug 01 2014 - 19:51:34 EDT