[XCSSA] Re: [SATLUG] Did everyone catch this--Microsoft takes on the free world

[xcssa@xcssa.org]

Tweeks,

Doesn't the patent holder have the privilege to prevent others from  
even using technology?  What about the privilege to prevent others  
from "distributing" technology, whether they charge for it or not?

The first case would apply to users of the technology.  While M$  
wouldn't go after me or you, they might go after big companies that  
use linux.

The second case would apply to Red Hat.

I'm one of those who opposes software patents in principle, like  
FSF.   Back in the 1970's, software was considered to be in the  
category of "mathematical formulae" and not patentable in principle.

Nothing in the patent law (that I know of, and I'm not an attorney)  
forces the patent holder to act in the public interest, other than  
"revealing the invention."  As far as I know, a company can even buy  
patent "B" simply to lock it up and prevent competition with their  
patent "A".

The constitution rationalizes patents to serve the public interest,  
and I think that part ought to be enforced, not assumed.  Patent  
holders get public "protection" through the courts, police, etc.,  
without having to pay a dime for that.

Show me the software patent where the public benefit exceeded the  
anti-competitive and anti-utilitarian public harm.  Typically  
software patent enforcement only comes into play long after the  
programmers are gone.

Same is true for copyright.  Law doesn't say copyrighted work needs  
to be distributed at all, at any price.  Can be simply locked up to  
suit the copyright holder.

In past, linux has been saved by proof of prior art, alternative  
patents, minor revision, etc.  I wasn't aware that the "zero cost"  
argument had any legal standing.

Charles


On May 15, 2007, at 10:32 PM, xcssa-admin@xcssa.org wrote:

> On Sunday 13 May 2007 18:02, Hector Bojorquez wrote:
>> http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/ 
>> 2007/05/28/100033867
>> Microsoft takes on the free world
>> Microsoft claims that free software like Linux, which runs a big  
>> chunk
>> of corporate America, violates 235 of its patents. It wants royalties
>> from distributors and users.
>
> M$ is trying to play poker with a house of cards here...
>
> M$ wants to charge royalties for free software (as in Liberty AND  
> BEER).