8 Dec
2004
8 Dec
'04
12:42 p.m.
On Wed, 08 Dec, 2004 at 05:17PM +0100, Jens M Andreasen spake thus:
The keyword here is *could*. It is an empty threat.
1) There is currently no valid patent issues with Linux. So there is no
issues to be resolved either.
2) If such an issue should be discovered, Novell will back up the Linux
side with their patent-portfolio, which (cough) *could* (cough) be an
expensive experience for the attacker.
3) Microsoft can't sue Singapore. They will have to get the US
government to do it for them, and then let WTO sort it out. And before
that they will have to force Singapore into thinking that SW-patents is
a neat idea. And then, although US might have the best government money
can buy, MS is still not the only kid in town with deep pockets.
4) The end user is not responsible for what patent issues the producer
might get involved with.
That's not really true.
All other points, especially the last one (relax) I agree with.
That is all.
So in short: Relax!
On ons, 2004-12-08 at 08:28 -0600, Cornell III, Howard M wrote:
>
> All,
>
> The 11/22 issue of Computerworld has a blurb about Microsoft CEO Steve
> Ballmer warning government leaders in Singapore that switching their
> 20,000 PCs from Windows to Linux could subject them to patent lawsuits.
> I have heard some tales about commercial versions of Linux including
> indemnification of users against these suits. What is the current
> status of the patent issues? Will they ever be resolved, or are all
> Linux users susceptible (proportional to the depth of their pockets)?
>
> Howard Cornell
>
>
--
"I'd crawl over an acre of 'Visual This++' and 'Integrated
Development
That' to get to gcc, Emacs, and gdb. Thank you."
(By Vance Petree, Virginia Power)