John Bailo wrote:
Roy Schestowitz wrote:
If Microsoft won?t sue, maybe Red Hat should
,----[ Quote ]
| It is not necessarily in Microsoft?s best interests to sue, however -
| it might as well drop a patent bomb on IBM instead. The same could be
| said for Red Hat, but given its willingness to stand up to SCO in the
| face of similar public comments (with IBM in its corner), a
| pre-emptive strike against Microsoft might not be completely out of
| the question.
`----
http://www.businessreviewonline.com/os/archives/2006/11/if_microsoft_wo.html
Look -- it's clear the *Giants* all have put themselves in a position of
MAD (Mutual Assured Destruction) and have no intention of suing, just
posturing to make sure they, themselves, don't get sued.
The real issue is that the /little/ /guy/, who has no IP, and doesn't
have $1000 to patent every new idea, doesn't get a piece of the action.
And with the mammoth of the industry innovating/producing very little,
its the hungry little guy that's the threat. Welcome to a stagnant
industry - exactly the argument against software patents.
|
|
