[konaice]

It should be pointed out that when challenged to point out the code that violates any of these 228 patents, Balmer subsequently backed down, and did not point out a single line of code.

Its easy to claim that Linux, or even a lug nut might be subject to law suits, because one can sue over anything, or nothing at all. One needs no proof to bring a suit, merely a lawyer with too much time on its hands. (And yes, I did mean to say "its" and not his...).

On the other hand, the amount of stolen UNIX code in Windows has recently been proven to be much larger than previously thought, when source code to Win2k was leaked/stolen a few years ago. Balmer seems unconcerned with this potential violation.

[Boundless]

> ... the amount of stolen UNIX code in Windows has recently
> been proven to be much larger than previously thought, ...

Not just Unix. Recall Stac Electronics (among many others)?
Mr. Bill is an equal-opportunity plagiarist, and since his
OS is closed-source, the purloined portions are harder to
find, but find them people do.

Anyway, MS bought a very expensive license from SCO,
ostensibly to protect MS from Unix claims, but it's
also speculated to have been a way for MS to fund the
SCO f.u.d. machine.

[rit]

Linux fans may someday have to square with issued patents. Sure there is a report about potential patent infringement which is not released to the public. But, anybody can see there are 25 issued US patents with claims containing Linux, not to mention the pending 150 applications, of which only one is assigned to Microsoft. It is never a problem until the patent holder asserts their patent, and, it is found to actually be valid.