On TechRepublic: Weirdest error messages of all time
BNET Business Network:
BNET
TechRepublic
ZDNet
TalkBack 28 of 42:
Next »
« Previous
I mostly agree
"It is fairly obvious that patents and cross-licensing offer very little to IP industries, and only serve to legally expose GPL type OSS in the software industry."

No, as you said, they also serve to insulate corporations from 'parasite companies' that are based solely on ownership of patents. And so far, it's been small companies and groups from within the OSS camp that have wielded patents as a weapon. I think that if software patents are generally omitted, you will see companies such as Microsoft relying less on patents and more on strategic partnerships and IP sharing (like the current Sun-Microsoft 'partnership'). Remember, Microsoft is a relative latecomer to the patent-as-arsenal game.

Of course, the threat to OSS by Microsoft's IP ownership and restrictions is real. Businesses use their proprietary processes to combat their competition all the time; it's nothing new from the software industry. OSS is a threat to Microsoft's business model, and MS will naturally resist. If Microsoft can combat OSS by restricting its IP, so what? I see nothing illegal or even particularly unethical about it, and the OSS movement is proving itself more than flexible enough to work around any impediments Microsoft may throw up.

Unless, of course, one is of the opinion that ideas shouldn't belong to anyone but should be freely shared for the benefit of humanity. That's another whole discussion entirely.

Carl Rapson
Posted by: rapson   Posted on: 12/21/04 You are currently: a Guest | Members login | Terms of Use
Reply to Story Reply to Message

Alert moderator to an offensive message

Subscribe to this discussion via Email or RSS

Great news for everybody but Microsoft.  DonnieBoy | 12/21/04
Only Microsoft?  rapson | 12/21/04
Microsoft has reason to  voska | 12/21/04
Not really  rapson | 12/21/04
Umm that's what patents are for though  voska | 12/21/04
Would you say the same about IBM?  rapson | 12/21/04
Carl Rapson, a well know Microsoft dill.  systemcleaner | 12/22/04
SCO!  Jeff Spicoli | 12/21/04
None that I've seen  rapson | 12/21/04
Might, maybe, could, possibly, perhaps, someday... Blah...  No_Ax_to_Grind | 12/21/04
Oh Oracle you said it to be true  voska | 12/21/04
And your selective reality needs repairing  Jeff Spicoli | 12/21/04
According to your crystal ball, axey  AmusedAtItAll | 12/22/04
Are you arguing patents or just defending Microsoft?  voska | 12/21/04
'Just' defending?  rapson | 12/21/04
If you don't fanaticaly hate MS, then your a shill.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 12/21/04
Well...  Jeff Spicoli | 12/21/04
Difference  rapson | 12/21/04
Really? Show me..  Jeff Spicoli | 12/21/04
Because Donnie seem very anti Microsoft  voska | 12/21/04
OK, sorry  rapson | 12/21/04
Yes, IBM's patent portfolio could be dangerous at some time too.  DonnieBoy | 12/21/04
MS has made some veiled threats on this subject  tic swayback | 12/21/04
Again, it's simply not possible...  No_Ax_to_Grind | 12/21/04
Actually, that's not true  tic swayback | 12/21/04
What?! You HAVE to be kidding  Jeff Spicoli | 12/21/04
MS Using Patents Indirectly Against OSS  P. Douglas | 12/21/04
I mostly agree  rapson | 12/21/04
Huh?  Jeff Spicoli | 12/21/04
Integrity has nothing to do with it  rapson | 12/21/04
Flailing at windmills again.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 12/21/04
Back tracking?  voska | 12/21/04
No you completely misunderstand.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 12/21/04
Something like a mine  IT_User | 12/21/04
Yes, Microsoft is not the only that could abuse patents.  DonnieBoy | 12/21/04
We??? Oh you mean the tiny minority of users.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 12/21/04
Small minority?  voska | 12/21/04
Just a teensy nitpick...  John Le'Brecage | 12/21/04
Good for them  Nigel Johnstone | 12/21/04
Good point.  Anton Philidor | 12/22/04
Not surprising ...  George Mitchell | 12/21/04
Poles push patents off EU agenda  patrice_z | 12/22/04

What do you think?

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

advertisement
advertisement