On 2009-03-21, Erik Funkenbusch <erik@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 21 Mar 2009 04:49:59 GMT, Gregory Shearman wrote:
>
>> On 2009-03-21, Erik Funkenbusch <erik@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> On Thu, 19 Mar 2009 22:16:58 +0000, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>>>
>>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
>>>>
>>>> TomTom countersues Microsoft in patent dispute
>>>>
>>>> ,----[ Quote ]
>>>>| TomTom has responded to Microsoft's patent suit by filing a patent
>>>>claim of | its own against the software maker. | | The GPS device
>>>>maker, based in the Netherlands, filed the countersuit in the | U.S.
>>>>District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia on Thursday.
>>>>`----
>>>>
>>>
>>> According to news reports, Tom Tom has been threatening to sue MS for
>>> over a year. So it turns out that Microsoft did not initiate the suit
>>> against Tom Tom, and are merely defending themselves. This was not,
>>> as the Linux community has so arrogantly assumed, an attack on Linux
>>> at all.
>>
>> Let's translate "defending themselves" as:
>>
>> Microsoft refuses to pay licence fees to TomTom for the use of their
>> patented technology.
>
> So let's translate yours.
>
> "Software patents are wonderful, as long as they are used against
> Microsoft. When Microsoft is considered to be infringing anyones patents,
> then they are lowlife scum, but when anyone else is found to be infringing
> Microsoft's patents, then it's Microsoft targeting others".
So, it's OK for Microsoft to threaten others with software patents, but
when others ask for Microsoft to pay licence fees on patents then it is
not OK?
Have I got that right?
--
Regards,
Gregory.
Gentoo Linux - Penguin Power
|
|
