Language Selection

English French German Italian Portuguese Spanish

M$/TomTom Lawsuit

Just as it appears
9% (37 votes)
Testing the waters
33% (135 votes)
Try to set precedence
28% (115 votes)
Start of War
29% (117 votes)
Total votes: 404

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

Opera Data Breach, Security of Personal Data

  • Opera User? Your Stored Passwords May Have Been Stolen
    Barely a week passes without another well-known web company suffering a data breach or hack of some kind. This week it is Opera’s turn. Opera Software, the company behind the web-browser and recently sold to a Chinese consortium for $600 million, reported a ‘server breach incident’ on its blog this weekend.
  • When it comes to protecting personal data, security gurus make their own rules
    Marcin Kleczynski, CEO of a company devoted to protecting people from hackers, has safeguarded his Twitter account with a 14-character password and by turning on two-factor authentication, an extra precaution in case that password is cracked. But Cooper Quintin, a security researcher and chief technologist at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, doesn’t bother running an anti-virus program on his computer. And Bruce Schneier? The prominent cryptography expert and chief technology officer of IBM-owned security company Resilient Systems, won’t even risk talking about what he does to secure his devices and data.

Android Leftovers

FOSS and Linux Events

  • On speaking at community conferences
    Many people reading this have already suffered me talking to them about Prometheus. In personal conversation, or in the talks I gave at DebConf15 in Heidelberg, the Debian SunCamp in Lloret de Mar, BRMlab in Prague, and even at a talk on a different topic at the RABS in Cluj-Napoca.
  • TPM Microconference Accepted into LPC 2016
    Although trusted platform modules (TPMs) have been the subject of some controversy over the years, it is quite likely that they have important roles to play in preventing firmware-based attacks, protecting user keys, and so on. However, some work is required to enable TPMs to successfully play these roles, including getting TPM support into bootloaders, securely distributing known-good hashes, and providing robust and repeatable handling of upgrades. In short, given the ever-more-hostile environments that our systems must operate in, it seems quite likely that much help will be needed, including from TPMs. For more details, see the TPM Microconference wiki page.
  • More translations added to the SFD countdown
    Software Freedom Day is celebrated all around the world and as usual our community helps us to provide marketing materials in their specific languages. While the wiki is rather simple to translate, the Countdown remains a bit more complicated and time consuming to localize. One needs to edit the SVG file and generate roughly a 100 pictures, then upload them to the wiki. Still this doesn’t scare the SFD teams around the world and we are happy to announce three more languages are ready to be used: French, Chinese and German!

Second FreeBSD 11.0 Release Candidate Restores Support for 'nat global' in IPFW

Glen Barber from the FreeBSD project announced the availability of the second RC (Release Candidate) development build of the upcoming FreeBSD 11.0 operating system. Read more