IWETHEY v. 0.3.0 | TODO
1,095 registered users | 0 active users | 0 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User
IWETHEY Banner

Welcome to IWETHEY!

New Put up a little something on the Novell deal.
[link|http://www.aaxnet.com/editor/edit041.html|Novell Screws Up Big]
[link|http://www.aaxnet.com|AAx]
New Typos...
Novel
excercise

It's a good read. :-)

Cheers,
Scott.
(Pedants 'R Us.)
Expand Edited by Another Scott Nov. 13, 2006, 07:56:16 PM EST
New Thanks - I was a bit rushed on the final check . . .
. . 'cause I had to run off to the bank - but you missed one of those "it's" thingies :)
[link|http://www.aaxnet.com|AAx]
New Ack! My excuse is I just used the Firefox spellchecker. :-)
New Oh. Take a look at Cringely, too.
He points out that Novell's WP anti-trust lawsuit probably had something to do with it too.

[link|http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/2006/pulpit_20061110_001188.html|I, Cringely at PBS].

Cheers,
Scott.
New Some more commentary on the deal.
[link|http://www.linuxjournal.com/node/1000121|Nick P. at LinuxJournal] and [link|http://msftextrememakeover.blogspot.com/2006/11/curiouser-and-curiouser.html|MSFTExtremeMakeover] (pointed to by an off-hand comment at [link|http://minimsft.blogspot.com/2006/11/no-so-limited-kim.html|MiniMicrosoft]).

Cheers,
Scott.
New One typo, one glaring error
... perhaps there was a little, pressure applied here ...
Drop the comma.
There's not a shred of evidence that Linux infringes any Microsoft patented material, and to prove such an infringement they'd have to expose their own proprietary code which they have been very reluctant to do (some say so people won't laugh at it).
Absolutely wrong. The patent covers the concept, the copyright covers the expression. All Microsoft needs to show infringement is the patent and the Linux code that implements the concept embodied in that patent.

And, not to go all [link|http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.html|Stallman][1] on you, but with Microsoft intentionally muddying the waters and conflating patents, licenses, copyrights, covenants-to-not-sue, etc etc etc ad nauseum, it would be best to avoid the phrase "intellectual property". If Microsoft specifically claims patent issues, address patent isues. If they talk about copyright, address copyright. If they use the phrase "intellectual property", assume they're trying to FUD things up and see if there's any "there" there.


[1] For some reason I can't connect to gnu.org just now.
===

Kip Hawley is still an idiot.

===

Purveyor of Doc Hope's [link|http://DocHope.com|fresh-baked dog biscuits and pet treats].
[link|http://DocHope.com|http://DocHope.com]
New A good point and I have corrected it.
[link|http://www.aaxnet.com|AAx]
     Put up a little something on the Novell deal. - (Andrew Grygus) - (7)
         Typos... - (Another Scott) - (2)
             Thanks - I was a bit rushed on the final check . . . - (Andrew Grygus) - (1)
                 Ack! My excuse is I just used the Firefox spellchecker. :-) -NT - (Another Scott)
         Oh. Take a look at Cringely, too. - (Another Scott)
         Some more commentary on the deal. - (Another Scott)
         One typo, one glaring error - (drewk) - (1)
             A good point and I have corrected it. -NT - (Andrew Grygus)

This buffer is for notes you don't want to save, and for Lisp evaluation.
72 ms