tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-496482.post7159121939233569262..comments2024-03-26T03:20:19.840-04:00Comments on For Some Value of "Magic": Don't Compete and Microsoft Won't SueStevehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15732819755000554717noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-496482.post-10138888569269926542008-02-24T12:32:00.000-05:002008-02-24T12:32:00.000-05:00@doug: Whatever results from this announcement it ...@doug: Whatever results from this announcement it is unlikely to have any effect at all on the EU's investigation into Microsoft's attempts to pack the various OOMXL national bodies to gain approval for its "standard". Like you, it seems, I believe Microsoft will interoperate fully only when legally compelled to do so.<BR/><BR/>@paul: I agree that software patents suits like Trend's represent a threat to open source as well as to proprietary software. As regards interoperability the big mistake was not formally recognizing Microsoft as a monopoly when the anti-trust hearings were held. They have proven reluctant to any coercion but the threat of huge fines ... and even that reluctantly.<BR/><BR/>@paddy3118: I doubt the EU will see these moves as bringing Microsoft into compliance, and three investigations into various aspects of the company's business have been opened since the last judgement, which Microsoft still has not complied with.<BR/><BR/>Thank you all for your comments. It's nice to know I have discriminating readers ... or indeed, any readers at all :-)Stevehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15732819755000554717noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-496482.post-8267614872631554462008-02-24T11:52:00.000-05:002008-02-24T11:52:00.000-05:00I had thought that the major reason for making suc...I had thought that the major reason for making such details public was to comply with the EU and so stop the heavy, and accumulating, fines that were imposed on them.<BR/><BR/>Their recent attitude towards open-source could be seen as forced rather than an enlightenment on their part?<BR/><BR/>- Paddy.Paddy3118https://www.blogger.com/profile/06899509753521482267noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-496482.post-35133665996005050262008-02-24T10:46:00.000-05:002008-02-24T10:46:00.000-05:00If anyone is still ignorant about the effect of so...If anyone is still ignorant about the effect of software patents on open source, they just need to familiarise themselves with the actions of Trend Micro against Barracuda. Patent predators like to portray themselves as unthreatening to open source projects until someone tries to make a living with such software; then, the predator moves in to "protect" their dubious monopoly.<BR/><BR/>We shouldn't legitimise Microsoft's non-standards. Instead, we should encourage genuine standards wherever possible and let that do to Microsoft what the emergence of widespread Internet usage didn't quite manage to do to them back in the 1990s.Paulhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01852251269492692660noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-496482.post-67733426828535454352008-02-24T02:01:00.000-05:002008-02-24T02:01:00.000-05:00The real problem here is when interoperability and...The real problem here is when interoperability and standards come into play.<BR/><BR/>Microsoft is the de-facto standard for many applications. If you are going to compete, then you must also interoperate. That is why the EU is forcing Microsoft to open up. You can't compete unless you also work with. That is the nature of software.<BR/><BR/>But you can't do that. Not without paying money or getting sued (or even both, if you go in for the licensing packages which can be revoked instead of contracting for the patents explicitly). <BR/><BR/>When seen in conjunction with the upcoming OOXML vote, the timing comes under suspicion as well.<BR/><BR/><A HREF="http://www.consortiuminfo.org/standardsblog/article.php?story=20080221092839846" REL="nofollow">Andy Updegrove</A> has an interesting take on all of this, and of course so does <A HREF="http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20080221184924826" REL="nofollow"> P.J.</A>.Doug Napoleonehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07331585381804299154noreply@blogger.com