In article <4175400.YYUk84nuGo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> What makes these patents unique is that without them, there is none
> of that 'interoperability' Microsoft and Novell love raving about.
> This shows that Microsoft sues over the glue which is based on the
> Microsoft 'standard'. In this case it's FAT; in another episode it
> can be Mono. These patents cannot be 'worked around' because of their
> nature of compatibility assurance. Jose X has a good essaythat
> demonstrates this point.
Perhaps you would care to show us where Microsoft has submitted FAT to
standardization at a recognized standards body? If you can't show such
a thing, than you comparison between the FAT patents and any patents
that may or may not apply to the parts of Mono used for writing Linux
apps is completely inapt.
(Of course you already knew that--but since actually taking into account
facts completely shoots down most of your arguments, you leave that out).
--
--Tim Smith
|
|
