Language Selection

English French German Italian Portuguese Spanish

M$/TomTom Lawsuit

Who's copying who isn't a clear cut case

The rise of MS is also an adventure of copyright violations and exploitation of weak patents. The computing industry has existed for a long time now and has for several years been an integrated part of people's daily life. Code that in the past was viewed as Mr. Merlin's magic is today is today a knowledge shared by many, even outside corporate buildings. Therefore I think this is more a testimony of how deprecated the whole idea of how patents work in this industry is. There's always a breaking point when something becomes common knowledge and therefore can't be viewed as intellectual property.

But of course if carton box still needs 6 (or is it 9?) patents printed on it in the US then probably FAT must be viewed as rocket science worthy of Nobel price to its initial author. Since exploitation of patents in itself is a lucrative business in the US you've got printed black on white that the system has to be overhauled. As it is now everything imaginable and thinkable beyond a coke and burger is valid to be patented. MS isn't alone in this silly brainstorm game; a look at many company's patent portfolios reveal the same.

No, I don't think this MS/TomTom thing is anything else but an attempt to strengthen a business model of living well on weak but never challenged patents. In view of how the market is changing faster than MS is able to adopt, it might be a "smart" move to make sure your economical future is a bit more secure even if your software fails, or sales of it.

The premesis and qualifications for a patent...

is an important question. A patent system isn't a universal unchangeable set of rules. Hence patent systems differ and what might be a valid patent in one country isn't even qualified to become one in another.

Emotions aren't of any interest and you're actually allowed to comment with a portion of playfulness with words, aren't you? If a patent system doesn't fulfil its intentional purpose it has become unproductive and in need of an overhaul.

I assume you don't like Bilski's arguments for a change of the US patent system? I fear that the lobby against such changes is too strong in both influence and money, but I believe the suggested changes would stimulate innovation and remove some of the obstacles to innovations. As of today it's difficult for innovators with limited money resources to defend their innovations.

Therefore my answer to your question [or questioning of my understanding] is: it's not good enough to only know current patent laws, it's even more vital to defend the initial purpose of them and strengthening them accordingly. We might have different opinions on the matter without the need to ridicule one another.

Schestowitz

Do you need glasses? Perhaps you should try one of those screen magnifier app's so you don't have to inflict the rest of us with your over sized type.

Obama, fix you f*ing system

"Since the birth of the Republic, the U.S. government has been in the business of handing out "exclusive rights" (a.k.a., monopolies) in order to "promote progress" or enable new markets of communication. Patents and copyrights accomplish the first goal; giving away slices of the airwaves serves the second. No one doubts that these monopolies are sometimes necessary to stimulate innovation. Hollywood could not survive without a copyright system; privately funded drug development won't happen without patents. But if history has taught us anything, it is that special interests—the Disneys and Pfizers of the world—have become very good at clambering for more and more monopoly rights. Copyrights last almost a century now, and patents regulate "anything under the sun that is made by man," as the Supreme Court has put it. This is the story of endless bloat, with each round of new monopolies met with a gluttonous demand for more."

--Lawrence Lessig

If they can uphold the

If they can uphold the patent, then they can make all the other companies using FAT pay up. Easy money.

More in Tux Machines

today's howtos

Linux Microsoft Office Alternatives

Despite what you may have been led to believe, there are in fact a number of solid Linux alternatives for Microsoft Office available. In fact, there are even options available with varied levels of docx support, if that is something relevant to your business. This article will explore my recommended Microsoft Office alternatives for Linux. Some of them you've likely heard of, others may be cloud/server based options that you might not have thought much about until now. Read more Also: The best open source video editors 2018: free to download, edit, use and share

Security: Updates, WordPress, Hardware Patches, and Open Source Security Podcast

  • Security updates for Tuesday
  • WordPress 4.9.2 Security and Maintenance Release
    WordPress 4.9.2 is now available. This is a security and maintenance release for all versions since WordPress 3.7. We strongly encourage you to update your sites immediately. An XSS vulnerability was discovered in the Flash fallback files in MediaElement, a library that is included with WordPress. Because the Flash files are no longer needed for most use cases, they have been removed from WordPress.
  • Debian-Based SolydXK Linux OS Receives Patch for Meltdown Security Vulnerability
    The Debian-based SolydXK Linux operating system has been updated today with patches for the Meltdown security vulnerability, as well as various other new features and improvements. To mitigate the Meltdown security exploit that allows a locally installed program to access the memory, including the kernel memory, and steal sensitive information like passwords and encryption keys, the SolydXK 201801 ISO images are now powered by the latest kernel release with patches against this vulnerability.
  • Chakra GNU/Linux Now Patched Against Meltdown & Spectre Security Vulnerabilities
    It's time for users of the Chakra GNU/Linux operating system to patch their systems against the Meltdown and Spectre security vulnerabilities as new kernel updates landed today in the repos. Publicly disclosed earlier this month, the Meltdown and Spectre security vulnerabilities are affecting us all, but OS vendors and OEMs are trying their best to mitigate them so that no user can be the victim of attacks where their sensitive data is at risk of getting in the hands of the wrong person.
  • Open Source Security Podcast: Episode 78 - Risk lessons from Hawaii

GNOME Devs to Users: Desktop Icons Are Moving to GNOME Shell with GNOME 3.28

There appears to be a lot of fuss lately about the removal of an option from the GNOME desktop environment that allows users to display icons on their desktops. Long story short, last month, near the Christmas holidays, GNOME developer Carlos Soriano shared his plans on removing a so-called "the desktop" feature from the Nautilus file manager starting with the upcoming GNOME 3.28 release of the desktop environment, proposing its integration into the GNOME Shell component. The feature is there to handle application icons on the user's workspace, but it shouldn't have been implemented in Nautilus in the first place, according to the developer. So for the GNOME devs to be able to add new features to the Nautilus file manager, they need to remove its ability to handle desktop icons and place the code somewhere else. Read more