SomeBloke <stuff@xxxxxxxxx> espoused:
> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>
>> Is Microsoft Claiming Ownership Of Embedded Linux?
>>
>> ,----[ Quote ]
>> | The question, of course, is why Kyocera Mita would need a patent from
>> | Microsoft to enhance products built on embedded Linux. Is it adding
>> | proprietary Microsoft technology on top of embedded Linux?
>> |
>> | Could be?
>> |
>> | Or is this a case of Kyocera Mita accepting a claim by Microsoft that
>> | embedded Linux is among the 235 open source technologies Microsoft
>> | insists it owns.
>> |
>> | Microsoft says the deal "delivers on our promise to continue to build a
>> | bridge between open source and proprietary software and technologies."
>> `----
>>
>>
> http://www.informationweek.com/blog/main/archives/2007/11/is_microsoft_cl.html
>
> Remind me not to buy any Kyocera Mita products. I wouldn't want to infringe
> any 'patents' would I.
>
I would certainly like to see a comprehensive list of organisations
which have bought any kind of Microsoft vouchering, so that they can be
exposed to the wider world, and in particular, that I can make sure that
I completely avoid them. I don't care who they are or what they do, I
just need to know who to avoid, and for that matter, who to tell my
friends and colleagues about.
In any case, Kyocera are absolutely of the list of anything I will
purchase going forward. If I find out what equipment they're included
with, I'll avoid them, too.
--
| Mark Kent -- mark at ellandroad dot demon dot co dot uk |
| Cola faq: http://www.faqs.org/faqs/linux/advocacy/faq-and-primer/ |
| Cola trolls: http://colatrolls.blogspot.com/ |
| My (new) blog: http://www.thereisnomagic.org |
|
|
