Rich Morgan 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.
>
This is true. In a lot of cases, code could simply be rewritten. But if
turned out to be something like the TCP stack, that could take quite a
bit of time and effort to recode.
If Microsoft thought they could get away with suing us out of existence,
they would. But it's hard to sue thousands of people across the globe.
Plus, you *really* don't want to piss off thousands of people who could
cause you no end of trouble by virtue of their technical expertise
(hacking MS websites, etc.). Even so, if they did sue, it wouldn't
matter about rewriting the code. We could do it, but those sued would
still be sued.
>
>> And the SCO cases when no where! So if MS is pulling the same old SCO
>> crap
>> then there no reason to concern with MS lawsuits. At the same time I
>> dont
>> think MS would give Kernel developers time to fix before a lawsuit but if
>> MS
>> had real creadible proof, then it will be like any other IP infringment
>> case. Fix the problems or pay the patent holder.
>
> The SCO case went nowhere because SCO didn't have the money to drag it out
> with IBM.
The SCO case went nowhere because they had no real case to begin with.
Regardless of how much money they had, they would ultimately lose the
case because they didn't have one.
> Robert, what most people fear is not if Microsoft is right but
> how Microsoft could financially destroy small commercial Linux companies
> by dragging out a costly legal battle. In court, it doesn't really matter
> who is right - it matters who has the most money and the best lawyers.
>
That's true and it's not true. There are certainly cases where lots of
expensive lawyers win the day. But there are also cases where they lose,
and where the poorer party wins. Microsoft mostly settles out of court
anyway.
I don't think MS wants to take on Redhat/Novell/Mandriva, etc. No one in
the press likes MS all that well, and they don't have a great reputation
among governments. Should they start a campaign to go after (fill in the
blank), they'd be tarred and feathered in the press, among other things.
There could also be possible backlash by governments.
MS certainly has enough eyes and enough Open Source code available to it
to figure out if we're infringing on their IP right quick. So their
either isn't any infringement, or there is and they don't want to sue.
There's also the possibility that *they're* infringing on *our* code (as
in including GPL code in their products. Agreements like Novell/MS also
cover *Microsoft*. Wouldn't it be interesting if using our code in their
products was the whole point of this exercise?
Paul
-- Paul M. Foster ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 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 - 19:50:02 EDT