On Sat, 03 Nov 2007 19:51:26 +0000, [H]omer wrote:
> Verily I say unto thee, that Mike spake thusly:
>
>> I've been following the money trail on these research reports for many
>> years and have always found that it points back to msft except for
>> those cases where there is no disclosure of financial backing
>
> Which is where sites like Groklaw and the Patent Troll Tracker come in
> useful. E.g. the link between IP Innovation LLC. (currently suing Red
> Hat and Novell over a 17 year old Xerox patent) and Acacia:
>
> http://www.groklaw.net/articlebasic.php?story=20071011205044141
>
at first glance I thought the patent was for the idea of a workspace
switcher, however, the description is so long and convoluted that it's
difficult to pin down exactly what it is, but that's probably a large
part of the reason that this particular patent was selected. IMO, they
just want to tie a case like this up in court for as long as possible so
for the entire time msft can wage an intensive FUD campaign against
Linux. Also of significant note is that this patent avoids the issue of
getting into specific "infringing code" which they know would be
immediately remedied by the open source developers (the code would be
changed or removed). Capitalism at it's best, such a great example of
how a monopoly is focused on the best interest of its consumers. (yes I
know the case isn't being made directly by msft but I'm not even going to
play along with the charade, I'm just going to call a spade a spade)
> And subsequently the link between Acacia and BayStar, one of the
> companies that bankrolled SCO's litigation farce:
>
> http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20071020193753215
>
> After having already established the link between BayStar and Microsoft:
>
> http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20061009152706664
>
> Of course there are also direct links between Acacia and Microsoft (at
> least two senior ex-employees), as shown in the first link above.
>
> Seems like the trail of corruption always leads back to Redmond.
|
|
