7 wrote:
> Moshe Goldfarb wrote:
>> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>>
>>> For East Texas Patent Lawyers: Maybe Next Time Don't Sue
>>> Random Open Source Developers
>>
>> Good advice!
>>
>> It's much better to report them to the Board of Health or
>> the Center For Disease Control.
>>
>> It's really the only way to clean up the freetard vermin.
>
> So that paytard vermin like micoshaft can take over?
[quote]
In an apparent escalation of its patent FUD strategy,
Microsoft sued the navigational system vendor, TomTom, for patent
infringement at the end of February 2009. Three patent claims
related to Linux are included in the lawsuit.[135]
At least two of them are related to highly questionable patents
on long file name support in Windows, which have been partially
invalidated by an EC patent court on the grounds that Microsoft’s
patent claims were “not based on inventive activity”.[136]
While Microsoft has publicly claimed that its action is not
directed against Linux or open source, and the case was settled
in March 2009 pursuant to a mostly confidential agreement, this
represents an aggressive development of Microsoft’s use of
spurious or highly questionable patent claims to intimidate and
eliminate competition from Linux in order to maintain or
strengthen its dominant position in the OS market.
[/quote]
Footnotes:
[quote]
135 See Bruce Perens, Analyzing Microsoft’s TomTom Lawsuit,
DATAMATION.COM, Mar. 1, 2009, available at
http://itmanagement.earthweb.com/osrc/article.php/3807801/Bruce-Perens-Analyzing-Microsofts-Linux-
Lawsuit.htm and Richard Hillesley, TomTom – The drums of a patent
war with Microsoft? ITPRO.COM, Mar. 5, 2009, available at
http://www.itpro.co.uk/610093/tomtom-the-drums-of-a-patent-war-with-microsoft.
136 See, e.g., Federal Patent Court declares FAT patent of
Microsoft null and void, HEISE ONLINE, Mar. 2, 2007, available at
http://www.heise.de/english/newsticker/news/86141.
[/quote]
>From PDF page 25,
http://www.ecis.eu/documents/Finalversion_Consumerchoicepaper.pdf
--
HPT
|
|
