-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Microsoft fights piracy through openness
,----[ Quote ]
| Despite recent strides made by the government and the private sector in
| combating piracy, the Philippines remains an intellectual property rights
| (IPR) hotspot in the region especially in terms of "optical media" and
| software.
|
| [...]
|
| Smith explained the decision to promote software inter-operability does not
| mean that the company has gone totally soft on the value it places on its
| proprietary software, on which it spends billions of dollars.
|
| "The other area in which [the new thrust] reflects continuity is the value
| placed on intellectual property," he said. "Our approach to patents reflects
| that."
|
| For example, when working with Microsoft's patented communication protocols,
| the company will provide a promise or covenant to open-source developers so
| that they could do their work without further needing to get their patent
| rights from the company.
|
| "But then if open-source software is distributed commercially, for example by
| a company or used commercially by a company, then we would expect people to
| think about our patent rights," Smith said. "And if they need a patent
| license, they could come and get one from us."
`----
http://business.inquirer.net/money/features/view/20080504-134542/Microsoft-fights-piracy-through-openness
Propaganda terms: "piracy", IPR, open-source, patent license
Groklaw says: "Here's my question: in countries that don't recognize software
patents as being legitimate, like the Philippines, why does Microsoft offer a
patent license? Also, note that this is confirmation that the new
interoperability deal from Microsoft is only for noncommercial use, which in
FOSS means nothing, since it's pretty much all both noncommercial and
commercial. Finally, Microsoft is pushing the concept that without patent
protection, there will be no innovation, but Microsoft built its monopoly
without patent protection, a fairly new thing in the US. So were they not
innovating?"
They also break the law in some countries (South Africa for a fact) by filing
software patent applications and disguising this.
Recent:
Open Parliament
,----[ Quote ]
| In private a government delegate compared
| Microsoft's public affairs methods with the scientology cult.
`----
http://www.noooxml.org/forum/t-54634/open-parliament
Related:
"I have mentioned before the "stacked panel". Panel discussions naturally favor
alliances of relatively weak partners - our usual opposition. For example,
an "unbiased" panel on OLE vs. OpenDoc would contain representatives of the
backers of OLE (Microsoft) and the backers of OpenDoc (Apple, IBM, Novell,
WordPerfect, OMG, etc.). Thus we find ourselves outnumbered in almost
every "naturally occurring" panel debate.
A stacked panel, on the other hand, is like a stacked deck: it is packed with
people who, on the face of things, should be neutral, but who are in fact
strong supporters of our technology. The key to stacking a panel is being able
to choose the moderator. Most conference organizers allow the moderator to
select the panel, so if you can pick the moderator, you win. Since you can't
expect representatives of our competitors to speak on your behalf, you have to
get the moderator to agree to having only "independent ISVs" on the panel. No
one from Microsoft or any other formal backer of the competing technologies
would be allowed – just ISVs who have to use this stuff in the "real world."
Sounds marvelously independent doesn't it? In fact, it allows us to stack the
panel with ISVs that back our cause. Thus, the "independent" panel ends up
telling the audience that our technology beats the others hands down. Get the
press to cover this panel, and you've got a major win on your hands."
-- Source: Microsoft
http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20071023002351958
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFIH9xrU4xAY3RXLo4RAkU6AKCkARYYQWLk4MTJ67GZipO7ezjgOQCgtC2X
oL1XN9giw3vsPY9cWzC/b0k=
=HJFX
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
|
|
