Roy Schestowitz wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Microsoft Patents XML Word Processing Documents
>
> ,----[ Quote ]
> | "Embrace. Extend. Patent. On Tuesday, Microsoft was granted U.S. Patent
> | No.7,571,169 for its 'invention' of the Word-processing document stored
> | in a single XML file that may be manipulated by applications that
> | understand XML. Presumably developers are protected by Microsoft's
> | 'covenant not to sue', so the biggest question raised by this patent is:
> | How in the world was it granted in light of the 40-year history of
> | document markup languages? Next thing you know, the USPTO will give
> | Microsoft a patent for Providing Emergency Data in XML format. Oops, too
> | late."
So when micoshaft marketing plops, minions and fraudsters
were banging on the ISO table across various
committees and across the globe insulting the intelligence
of every tom dick and harry present at the table,
they were also patenting what they preached as the crap that
should be adopted as an international standard?
They rub salt into the sour cespit of their own making by
not admitting they were seeking patents while they were
forcing everyone to approve micoshaft pat pending crap?
Sheesh! There is never an end to Micoshaft Corporation Crap!!
> http://yro.slashdot.org/story/09/08/06/2322209
Microsoft-Patents-XML-Word-Processing-Documents?art_pos=1
>
> 800 pages of defect for OOXML, here it is
>
> ,----[ Quote ]
> | 800 pages of defect for OOXML, here it is. ISO is such a transparent
> | organisation that they are afraid of the web, and the public light of
> | the blogosphere. Here is the leak for you.
> `----
>
> http://www.noooxml.org/forum
t-174349/800-pages-of-defect-for-ooxml-here-it-is
>
>
> Recent:
>
> Microsoft, OOXML and the ISO
>
> ,----[ Quote ]
> | Taken individually, these dubious actions might be dismissed by
> | Microsoft as ?minor lapses?, ?misunderstandings? or actions of an
> | atypical ?rogue? manager ? as was done in Sweden, where an offer was
> | made to support partners financially if they attended the key meeting of
> | the national body and voted in favour of OOXML. But taken together they
> | suggest a consistent philosophy of being prepared to use whatever means
> | necessary in order to gain the required number of votes.
> |
> | Since there are very few laws relevant to this field, I doubt whether
> | Microsoft has broken any with its actions during the ISO standardisation
> | process, either through those already disclosed, or others that may come
> | come to light (although the European Commission may have its own views
> | on this). But as well as the letter of the law, the spirit matters too,
> | and I would be interested to hear to what extent, against a background
> | of skewed committees, misrepresentations and overt pressure, Microsoft
> | thinks it adhered to the spirit of the collegial, consensus-based
> | standards-making process in finally obtaining that much-coveted ?win?
> | for OOXML.
> `----
>
> http://www.linuxjournal.com/content/microsoft-ooxml-and-iso
>
>
> Related:
>
> Microsoft, OOXML and the ISO
>
> ,----[ Quote ]
> | Taken individually, these dubious actions might be dismissed by
> | Microsoft as ?minor lapses?, ?misunderstandings? or actions of an
> | atypical ?rogue? manager ? as was done in Sweden, where an offer was
> | made to support partners financially if they attended the key meeting of
> | the national body and voted in favour of OOXML. But taken together they
> | suggest a consistent philosophy of being prepared to use whatever means
> | necessary in order to gain the required number of votes.
> |
> | Since there are very few laws relevant to this field, I doubt whether
> | Microsoft has broken any with its actions during the ISO standardisation
> | process, either through those already disclosed, or others that may come
> | come to light (although the European Commission may have its own views
> | on this). But as well as the letter of the law, the spirit matters too,
> | and I would be interested to hear to what extent, against a background
> | of skewed committees, misrepresentations and overt pressure, Microsoft
> | thinks it adhered to the spirit of the collegial, consensus-based
> | standards-making process in finally obtaining that much-coveted ?win?
> | for OOXML.
> `----
>
> http://www.linuxjournal.com/content/microsoft-ooxml-and-iso
>
>
> Buy, Cheat, Steal, and Lie: The OOXML Story
>
> ,----[ Quote ]
> | A 2007 decision from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit may
> | end up coming back to haunt Microsoft in their ongoing U.S. antitrust
> | battle. The case revolved around claims by Broadcom that Qualcomm had
> | deliberately included its patents in the Universal Mobile
> | Telecommunications System standard in order to create a monopoly for its
> | products. The appeals court held that if a company acts deceptively to
> | gain adoption of a standard that then results in a monopoly to their
> | advantage, they can be held to have violated anti-trust laws,
> | irrespective of their right to determine the use of their patents.
> | Interestingly enough, the Court of Appeals ruling relies on a Federal
> | Trade Commission ruling which in turn relied on ? drumroll, please ?
> | United States v. Microsoft, the very case that put MS under supervision
> | in the first place.
> |
> | All we can say is, we hope that with this many available avenues,
> | something is done to rectify the farce acted out over the last several
> | months.
> `----
>
> http://www.linuxjournal.com/content/buy-cheat-steal-and-lie-ooxml-story
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
>
> iEYEARECAAYFAkp8Nv4ACgkQU4xAY3RXLo6+4gCfSrZS17zX8suPwJbx38MHthX8
> KwAAoLG32AvaLi7EURqkvxjEXQfQQdWl
> =5Ynr
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
|
|
