thelinuxlink.net

Groklaw summary:
http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?stor ... 1205044141
The actual patent:
http://www.google.com/patents?id=3tUkAA ... =5,072,412

All I have to say is the patent system in the U.S. really needs to be reformed ASAP. I wonder if Microsoft had anything to do with this?

Patrick wrote:I wonder if Microsoft had anything to do with this?

I bet this "IP Innovation" (I just can't say that name without using quotes and still have a straight face) mysteriously received some money from a Swiss bank account

I'm fed up with hearing about these insane software patents. All these patent holders can go f themselves. I don't care if people call me a cock-eyed communist idealist, but I agree 100% with Stallman on this. All software patents are evil.

Edit: You guys really need to re-think this whole automated censoring plug-in you got going on here. In this post just above it replaced the word

"c0ck-eyed" with...

"a what uncle leroy showed at a party one summer-eyed"

... do you guys really think that's necessary?

The Groklaw article begins to show the connection to MS. While I am not sure there will ever be a proven direct link; I for one suspect it is there. Let's face it, even Ballmer couldn't keep this to himself with his warnings and gloating. Given all that, Novell should be pissed. But then again, who couldn't see that laying down with the devil is only going to get you stabbed in the back with a pitchfork.

Alas, I really hope this is the start of the end for this litigation crap. It would be great if it was the FOSS community to bring it all down.

greggh wrote:I'm fed up with hearing about these insane software patents. All these patent holders can go f themselves.

Ai matie! Couldn't have said it better myself!

greggh wrote:I don't care if people call me a what uncle leroy showed at a party one summer-eyed communist idealist, but I agree 100% with Stallman on this. All software patents are evil.

A few months ago I saw a hilarious joke on Slashdot that was along these lines: "What Americans casually call communists, Europeans call socialists, and what Europeans call communists, Americans call left-wing extremists". I don't mean to claim that this is true or not, but I just found it extremely hilarious.
Just because one agrees with Richard Stallman on something doesn't make one a communist, in fact Richard himself is not a communist. There's a fairly hefty line between a socialist and a communist, I have heard Richard say "that is just capitalism", in the context of musicians making less money of their music is garbage and liked by nobody.

Anyway, just thought I'd say that.

Yeah software patents are an absolutely retarded idea, that only opposes and prevents progress and the freedom to invent and create.

greggh wrote:Edit: You guys really need to re-think this whole automated censoring plug-in you got going on here. In this post just above it replaced the word

"c0ck-eyed" with...

"a what uncle leroy showed at a party one summer-eyed"

... do you guys really think that's necessary?

Yeah I have been thinking the same thing myself. I mean it's not like this forum is gonna make innocent children start to swear like pirates, for crying out loud!!!

Tsuroerusu wrote:A few months ago I saw a hilarious joke on Slashdot that was along these lines: "What Americans casually call communists, Europeans call socialists, and what Europeans call communists, Americans call left-wing extremists". I don't mean to claim that this is true or not, but I just found it extremely hilarious.

Just because one agrees with Richard Stallman on something doesn't make one a communist, in fact Richard himself is not a communist. There's a fairly hefty line between a socialist and a communist

We know what socialism is and no it's not the answer (at least for us). Communism is great in theory. Once you add the human element into the equation it goes straight to hell.

Tsuroerusu wrote: Yeah software patents are an absolutely retarded idea, that only opposes and prevents progress and the freedom to invent and create.

We absolutely agree on that.

This lawsuit is pure bullsh|t!! M$ can't compete with Linux so it's attacking it via proxy companies. The connection needs to be documented and a campaign of public shaming against M$ needs to be started. The government should step in and break up this monopoly. They won't! M$ "contributes" a lot of money to politicians from both major parties. Their "friends" will protect them.

Patrick wrote:This lawsuit is pure bullsh|t!!

Yeah, and especially when you consider that this sh!t patent was filed in 1987, aren't any patent supposed to only last like 18 or 20 years? I was born in 1988 and I am 19 years old, damn it!!

Tsuroerusu wrote:Yeah, and especially when you consider that this sh!t patent was filed in 1987, aren't any patent supposed to only last like 18 or 20 years? I was born in 1988 and I am 19 years old, damn it!!

I remember virtual desktops on my Amiga. The Amiga was developed around 1982 and sold in 1985. Hello prior art!!

M$ can't compete with Linux. It has to smear it with FUD to survive. The most dangerous kind of animal is the one that is scared and wounded. Throw in deep pockets and things get very ugly.

Patrick wrote:

Tsuroerusu wrote:Yeah, and especially when you consider that this sh!t patent was filed in 1987, aren't any patent supposed to only last like 18 or 20 years? I was born in 1988 and I am 19 years old, damn it!!

I remember virtual desktops on my Amiga. The Amiga was developed around 1982 and sold in 1985. Hello prior art!!

Pat you should send Mr. Szulik an email along with this information!!

Patrick wrote:M$ can't compete with Linux. It has to smear it with FUD to survive. The most dangerous kind of animal is the one that is scared and wounded. Throw in deep pockets and things get very ugly.

I personally agree with you on that, but if you told a Windows guys this, or even someone who is neutral is this war/competition then he'd say something like this "Sure Microsoft can compete, if they couldn't how come Linux hasn't taken over the world?". This is their argument, not mine.

I once read an article by Jeremy Allison where he was talking about the future of free software:
"What should the Open Source/Free Software community do about Vista? In my opinion, we need to just keep doing what we're doing. Various pundits have predicted doom and gloom if we don't compromise on our principles and adopt proprietary drivers, or license proprietary media codecs to allow Apple iPods to work with Linux. I don't agree. You don't change a winning strategy just as you're starting to succeed. Linux has become completely dominant in some areas such as high performance computing and outshines Windows in areas like Web serving. It's just in the workgroup server space, which is tied into the Windows desktop, that the Microsoft monopoly still holds. We need to keep improving our products and, most importantly, keep offering the one feature that only we have, the one that Microsoft can't copy without completely changing their businesses model. We need to keep offering our users software Freedom. If Microsoft wants to copy that, then I'd welcome it and welcome them to our community. But I think they have to go through the tipping point with Windows Vista first."

Patrick wrote:We know what socialism is and no it's not the answer (at least for us). Communism is great in theory. Once you add the human element into the equation it goes straight to hell.

I realize this is way off-topic, but it's fairly easy to see the parallels between free, voluntary libertarian socialism and the free software movement. Stallman has flat out refused to say he believes in the philosophy, but if you listen to what he says, what the GPL stands for (it is very socialistic in nature), and what collectivist strains of anarchism and socialism are all about, it's easy to see the connection, whether he will admit it or not. You can even apt-get a libertarian socialist (anarchist) FAQ on Ubuntu and Debian systems if you want to learn more.

http://packages.ubuntu.com/feisty/doc/anarchism

Jeremy points out the M$ connection:
http://jeremy.linuxquestions.org/2007/1 ... at-novell/

We need somebody with deep pockets to go on a anti-M$ advertising campaign.

The history of virtual desktops:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_desktop#Amiga

Makes me wonder if Novell feels stabbed in the back or are they part of the scam. I think Steve Ballmer is of swiss heritage. Is his middle init "o" by any chance? For somebody who went to harvard, one would think he would understand the concept of innocent till proven guilty as to his supposed false accusations.
When I had a commodore 64 we had software that would emulate certain gaming systems like a virtual screen.. In fact in writing games, one of the tricks was to do page flipping which in essense was a virtual screen. Maybe I should send some example code to Redhat for prior art. The lawsuit makes me ashamed to say I am from Texas.


http://www.ubersoft.net/comic/hd/2007/1 ... eripherals

Steve Balmer is not stupid - he is quite a character, but he is not stupid. You have to realize his main focus is not spreading the truth, but planting seeds of doubt. He is not making an argument in favor of MS, he's scaring people away from using linux. Microsoft didn't gain its current stranglehold on the entire tech industry by being stupid - they did it by being crafty, greedy, and ruthless. Please don't underestimate Balmer just because he seems like a sweaty uncle-fester-looking jackass in some videos online.

Something I was thinking about right after I read the articles was it sounds like there may be another player in this: Apple. They were the original target and they settled. It go me thinking, that their settling, which in some ways sounds like admission of guilt; may set the stage against future defendants. Face it, it would be a boon for apple if Linux took a serious fall. They are just as much against the wall as MS when it comes to Linux; in fact it almost seems they have more to lose.

Anyway, my thoughts seem to be lent some credibility by PJ's latest post: http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?stor ... 3120300438

good stuff there.

Microsoft states for the record that they are not in any way involved in this litigation...

http://blogs.zdnet.com/open-source/?p=1558

“Microsoft is not a party to Acacia’s lawsuit against Red Hat and Novell, nor are we involved in any way in this litigation,” according to an official statement from the company, released Tuesday by Microsoft spokesman Mark Martin.

So we should chaulk all of this up to coincidence?

In a nutshell, yes. When asked to comment on the coincidences and timing of Ballmer’s comments, the Microsoft spokesman reiterated that “Microsoft is not involved in any way in this litigation” and hinted that should “address any questions of coincidence or timing.”

Observers may not have all the facts but there is ample reason to be suspicious. Microsoft originally claimed that it played no part in SCO’s litigation against IBM but it was later revealed that the software giant indirectly handed off $50 million to SCO through BayShore Capital.