Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: muawiyah
I suggested that the items Microsoft is complaining about might well be code for code IDENTICAL ~ and that would satisfy all of us that there could have been some hanky-panky...

OK. While I agree that there *may* possibly be identical code, the next question would be "in which direction was the copying done?" The SCO case proved that while SCO claimed infringement, and showed a little code, it was proved that the SCO code was newer than the Linux code--hence it was *SCO* that was copying from the GPL code.

With patents, it doesn't really matter who wrote it first--only who owns the patent. So the next step would be to determine if the patent is valid--and there are many who believe that a lot of MS' patents are not valid.

So any case MS would bring will be an interesting case study in all this and the finer points of patent law.

78 posted on 05/15/2007 5:22:01 AM PDT by ShadowAce (Linux -- The Ultimate Windows Service Pack)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies ]


To: ShadowAce

No doubt Microsoft intends to plumb the depths eh!


79 posted on 05/15/2007 5:57:07 AM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson