Home Messages Index
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index

Re: [Roy Schestowitz is Intellectually Dishonest] Behind Microsoft|Horacio Gutierrez's Attack on GNU/Linux and Why He Should be Sacked (was: [News] Behind Microsoft|Horacio Gutierrez's Attack on GNU/Linux and Why He Should be Sacked)

In article <rgjwvmf2kjiz$.dlg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
 Erik Funkenbusch <erik@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> In another bit of intellectual dishonesty, he says this:
> 
> "So, if you want to know what the patents are, you're going to have to
> approach Microsoft with a good faith intention of having a licensing
> discussion. In other words, you need to pay it money."

Note the implication that Microsoft requires you to pay in order to have 
a licensing discussion.  Does he have any support for that remarkable 
notion?

> 
> Yet he quotes Gutierrez as this:
> 
> "Microsoft publishes every patent that Microsoft gets issued"

Even if they didn't, the Patent Office does.

...
> Clearly, Furber knows that all issued patents are public knowledge and
> searchable, for free, in any of a number of databases, yet he
> disingenuously proclaims that the only way to know what MS's patents are is
> to pay them money.
> 
> More intellectual dishonesty.
> 
> The fact of the matter is, all of MS's issued patents are publicly
> searchable, and you're free to search anything to see if any Linux code is
> violating those patents.
> 
> Nobody wants to do that, though.  You know why?  Because if you search the
> database and find anything, then you're *willfully* infringing, and that
> carries treble damages if someone sues you.  The open source crowd would

Not necessarily.  If you have a reasonable belief that you are not 
infringing a valid patent, and that turns out to be wrong, the 
infringement won't be willful.  For example, if you believe that you 
know of prior art that would invalidate the patent, then your belief 
that you are not infringing a valid patent is probably sufficient to 
save you from willfulness (especially if you get an attorney's opinion 
that the prior art would invalidate the opinion).

-- 
--Tim Smith

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index