[Golden Eagle]

Sun has owned StarOffice since 1999...So why did Microsoft claim 45 patent infringements specifically by OpenOffice? You can't claim infringement if you have an all-encompassing cross-licensing agreement.

Obviously because StarOffice is owned by Sun, not OpenOffice. Only a decietful moonbat would keep trying to confuse the 2, even Shadow came clean on that already.

How disingenuous and ignorant of you

LOL no the facts are the Free Software Foundation's chief lawyer just announced he is resigning, as I said. Not only are you a sellout you're an obvious liar to deny it.

[antiRepublicrat]

Obviously because StarOffice is owned by Sun, not OpenOffice.

Okay, now what part of "Sun open-sourced StarOffice in 2000" do you not understand? If you open source something, you still own it. True, some portions of OpenOffice belong to other contributors, but Sun contributed the initial code and the vast majority of the code since then.

So run OpenOffice and look for the Sun logo on the splash screen. Or are you afraid your eyes will burn if you look at open source software? Okay then:

Wow, look at that, a Sun logo on a product that Sun supposedly doesn't own. A patent suit against OpenOffice is a patent suit against StarOffice, since StarOffice is OpenOffice plus proprietary additions. Microsoft claimed 45 infringements in OpenOffice, and thus 45 infringements by Sun.

You must have forgotten the part about the Sun/Microsoft cross-license agreement being for previously-contended patents, and not covering all of them.

LOL no the facts are the Free Software Foundation's chief lawyer just announced he is resigning

So that he could continue his work in support of open source in a more effective way, actively defending open source projects from lawsuits. Your implication that he wasn't committed was disingenuous at best, blatant lie at worst.