IWETHEY v. 0.3.0 | TODO
1,095 registered users | 0 active users | 2 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User
IWETHEY Banner

Welcome to IWETHEY!

New Well, now we know. It *is* going to use patent...
infringement to try to kill Linux.

[link|http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/2007/05/28/100033867/index.htm|Microsoft takes on the free world]

A run down of the 235 Patents *Microsoft* claims Linux and other parts infringe.

In the story, Gutierrez, breaks down that figure into the following categories:
  1. The Linux kernel allegedly infringes 42 Microsoft patents. (The kernel is the deepest layer of the operating system, which interacts most directly with the hardware.)
  2. The Linux user interfaces allegedly infringe 65 patents. (The user interfaces are the way design elements, like menus and toolbars, are set up to promote easy and intuitive use.)
  3. The Open Office programs allegedly infringe 45 patents. (This a suite of free software programs analogous to Microsoft\ufffds Office, including, for instance, word processing, spreadsheet, and presentation software, which perform functions like Microsoft\ufffds Word, Excel and PowerPoint products.)
  4. Free email programs allegedly infringe 15 patents.
  5. Other assorted free software programs that are frequently included in Linux distributions allegedly violate another 68 patents.


Cool. Microsoft, which exact patents are they? List please.

This will be SCO v IBM all over again.

Edit: I forgot to add the Groklaw Article

[link|http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20070513234519615|Ooh, ooh, the bogeyman is gonna getcha with his stupid patents. Or maybe not.]

I guess you could say that PJ is rather jaded about this.
--
[link|mailto:greg@gregfolkert.net|greg],
[link|http://www.iwethey.org/ed_curry|REMEMBER ED CURRY!] @ iwethey
PGP key: 1024D/B524687C 2003-08-05
Fingerprint: E1D3 E3D7 5850 957E FED0  2B3A ED66 6971 B524 687C
Alternate Fingerprint: 09F9 1102 9D74  E35B D841 56C5 6356 88C0
Expand Edited by folkert May 14, 2007, 12:34:47 PM EDT
New Wow...kernel violates 42 different patents
thats pretty good.
Too much of today's music is fashionable crap dressed as artistry.Adrian Belew
New pretty funny as well as the NT Kernel
sits on top of Mach :-)
thanx,
bill
Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free american and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 51 years. meep

reach me at [link|mailto:bill.oxley@cox.net|mailto:bill.oxley@cox.net]
New Huh? [Insert perplexed dog picture here]
--
Chris Altmann
New here
from here
[link|http://www.microsoft.com/technet/archive/ntwrkstn/evaluate/featfunc/kernelwp.mspx?mfr=true|http://www.microsoft...lwp.mspx?mfr=true]
4Commercial implementations of the Carnegie-Mellon University Mach microkernel operating system, for example, typically run at least all file system, networking, and memory management code in kernel mode.
so claiming kernel IP while running on a tweaked Open Source kernel. Even though Richard Rashid has worked for $MS since 1991 I doubt that his work was untainted by prior art.
thanx,
bill
Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free american and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 51 years. meep

reach me at [link|mailto:bill.oxley@cox.net|mailto:bill.oxley@cox.net]
New Umm
That doesn't say or mean "the NT kernel sits on top of Mach".
--
Chris Altmann
New it does, maybe I need a better source
Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free american and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 51 years. meep

reach me at [link|mailto:bill.oxley@cox.net|mailto:bill.oxley@cox.net]
New links
[link|http://chronicle.com/colloquylive/2003/02/microsoft/|http://chronicle.com...003/02/microsoft/]
Some of the most well-respected software in the world got its start in the academic world. The Mach kernel from Carnegie Mellon University is one example. Microsoft, as I have read, has borrowed a number of technologies from Mach to make Windows 2000 and Windows XP possible. How do the best student programmers protect the originality of their work from Microsoft on a system like Palladium? And how can a new and energetic software developer possibly innovate under a system as closed as Palladium?
[link|http://www.dimi.uniud.it/~lenisa/unix-history.html|http://www.dimi.uniu...unix-history.html]
David Cutler leaves DEC and joins Microsoft (October 31) to develop Windows NT. Microsoft begins evaluating the Mach Kernel.
coincidence? mail between the MS folks [link|http://discussms.hosting.lsoft.com/SCRIPTS/WA-MSD.EXE?A2=ind0002d&L=dcom&D=0&P=5898|http://discussms.hos...L=dcom&D=0&P=5898]
Thanks for your response. This makes sense.
Steve I have read "Inside Windows NT" and understood it. It also says in
section 4.2.2. that initializing address spaces is expensive (relatively)
and that is why threads exist and also called "light weight processes"

This concept of scheduling threads is not alien to me. To me it is a copy of
the concepts developed in Mach kernel. [Did Rick Rashid have a say in
design of NT ? [link|http://www.research.microsoft.com/users/rashid/|http://www.research....com/users/rashid/] ]

For further reference see the paper "Mach Threads and the Unix Kernel: The
Battle for Control." at the CMU site.
[link|http://www.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs/project/mach/public/www/doc/publications.html|http://www.cs.cmu.ed...publications.html]

Steve do I really have to forget all these things I did 8 years ago to be a
Windows programmer ? :->
one more from $MS themselves [link|http://www.microsoft.com/technet/archive/winntas/evaluate/featfunc/windowsn.mspx?mfr=true|http://www.microsoft...wsn.mspx?mfr=true]

Microsoft has called Windows NT a "multiple-personality operating system," as it was designed to support more than one application programming interface (API). This makes it is easier to provide emulation for older OS environments as well as the ability to more easily add new interfaces without requiring major changes to the system. The technique that Windows NT uses is called a "microkernel" and was influenced by the Mach microkernel developed at Carnegie Mellon University. (The kernel is the central part of operating system.)
clean room IP my ass

Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free american and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 51 years. meep

reach me at [link|mailto:bill.oxley@cox.net|mailto:bill.oxley@cox.net]
New links
[link|http://chronicle.com/colloquylive/2003/02/microsoft/|http://chronicle.com...003/02/microsoft/]
Some of the most well-respected software in the world got its start in the academic world. The Mach kernel from Carnegie Mellon University is one example. Microsoft, as I have read, has borrowed a number of technologies from Mach to make Windows 2000 and Windows XP possible. How do the best student programmers protect the originality of their work from Microsoft on a system like Palladium? And how can a new and energetic software developer possibly innovate under a system as closed as Palladium?
[link|http://www.dimi.uniud.it/~lenisa/unix-history.html|http://www.dimi.uniu...unix-history.html]
David Cutler leaves DEC and joins Microsoft (October 31) to develop Windows NT. Microsoft begins evaluating the Mach Kernel.
coincidence? mail between the MS folks [link|http://discussms.hosting.lsoft.com/SCRIPTS/WA-MSD.EXE?A2=ind0002d&L=dcom&D=0&P=5898|http://discussms.hos...L=dcom&D=0&P=5898]
Thanks for your response. This makes sense.
Steve I have read "Inside Windows NT" and understood it. It also says in
section 4.2.2. that initializing address spaces is expensive (relatively)
and that is why threads exist and also called "light weight processes"

This concept of scheduling threads is not alien to me. To me it is a copy of
the concepts developed in Mach kernel. [Did Rick Rashid have a say in
design of NT ? [link|http://www.research.microsoft.com/users/rashid/|http://www.research....com/users/rashid/] ]

For further reference see the paper "Mach Threads and the Unix Kernel: The
Battle for Control." at the CMU site.
[link|http://www.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs/project/mach/public/www/doc/publications.html|http://www.cs.cmu.ed...publications.html]

Steve do I really have to forget all these things I did 8 years ago to be a
Windows programmer ? :->
one more from $MS themselves [link|http://www.microsoft.com/technet/archive/winntas/evaluate/featfunc/windowsn.mspx?mfr=true|http://www.microsoft...wsn.mspx?mfr=true]

Microsoft has called Windows NT a "multiple-personality operating system," as it was designed to support more than one application programming interface (API). This makes it is easier to provide emulation for older OS environments as well as the ability to more easily add new interfaces without requiring major changes to the system. The technique that Windows NT uses is called a "microkernel" and was influenced by the Mach microkernel developed at Carnegie Mellon University. (The kernel is the central part of operating system.)
clean room IP my ass

Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free american and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 51 years. meep

reach me at [link|mailto:bill.oxley@cox.net|mailto:bill.oxley@cox.net]
New Re: links
I see phrases like "copy of the concepts developed in Mach kernel", and "influenced by the Mach microkernel" which, while they would certainly be pertinent to the current discussion if the patents in question cover those concepts and techniques, does not equate to NT "sitting on top of Mach".

Mac OS X. Now there's something that "sits on top of Mach".

--
Chris Altmann
New mac osx of course sits on top of mach
and they admit it :-)
You are right, until there is a lawsuit and the $MS source code would need to be brought in as evidence would we know for sure that NT uses a hybrid micro kernel, sitting on top of Mach :-)
thanx,
bill
Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free american and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 51 years. meep

reach me at [link|mailto:bill.oxley@cox.net|mailto:bill.oxley@cox.net]
New WhatEVar.
It's been common knowledge for, oh, about twelve or thirteen years now, that NT's kernel (and hence W2K/XP/Vista's) is more like VMS than it is like anything UNIX-ish[0]. You even cited the fact that the VMS architect, Dave Cutler, had a lot to do with it.
[0]That's not to say, of course, that any of the VMS goodness has made it into Windows The Product, just that there are shades of VMS The Kernel in Windows The Kernel.


Peter
[link|http://www.no2id.net/|Don't Let The Terrorists Win]
[link|http://www.kuro5hin.org|There is no K5 Cabal]
[link|http://guildenstern.dyndns.org|Home]
Use P2P for legitimate purposes!
[link|http://kevan.org/brain.cgi?pwhysall|A better terminal emulator]
[image|http://i66.photobucket.com/albums/h262/pwhysall/Misc/saveus.png|0|Darwinia||]
New How do you spell "irrelevant"?
M-I-C-R-O-S-O-F-T.
bcnu,
Mikem

It would seem, therefore, that the three human impulses embodied in religion are fear, conceit, and hatred. The purpose of religion, one might say, is to give an air of respectibility to these passions. -- Bertrand Russell
New Looks like a repeat of SCOSource
It looks like Microsoft used SCO as a test bed with SCOSource, and now they are trying the same thing with some tweaks. The basic plan looks to be exactly the same, get big companies to sign up for vague and expensive license contracts without exactly explaining what is being licensed. In essence it is a fancy extortion scam, pay up for some insurance or something bad might happen.

SCO's problem was that they couldn't get anybody to take them seriously without a lawsuit first, and then they where stupid enough to target IBM rather then say RedHat. Microsoft has enough power and credibility that they can further without one. But eventually they will have to sue somebody or even managers will realize that the threat is empty.

And then their case gets hard. No matter who they go after, the big names will kick in some money to insure a good defense. And then Microsoft will have to spell out the details.

It wouldn't surprise me if Microsoft plays this to see how many companies they can get signed up without suing anybody. And then when it plays out, they just give up and move on to the next scheme. For Microsoft FUD is more useful then any real lawsuit. And as long as they don't sue they can imply they are on the verge of doing so. But once they sue and lose it is over.

Jay
New This is a clear civil RICO case
Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free american and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 51 years. meep

reach me at [link|mailto:bill.oxley@cox.net|mailto:bill.oxley@cox.net]
New Its a very dangerous game
If it turns out that the Courts invalidate a good chunk of those patents...MS runs a risk of losing a big chuck of corporate value.
Too much of today's music is fashionable crap dressed as artistry.Adrian Belew
New To quote an idiot, "Bring it on!"
They have stolen so much from so many, it's incredible. "Clippy" is the only "innovation" I'm aware of and they can keep that one.
Alex

When fascism comes to America, it'll be wrapped in a flag and carrying a cross. -- Sinclair Lewis
New xenix had a lot of good innovation
Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free american and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 51 years. meep

reach me at [link|mailto:bill.oxley@cox.net|mailto:bill.oxley@cox.net]
New Yes, but what did they do with it?
--
[link|mailto:greg@gregfolkert.net|greg],
[link|http://www.iwethey.org/ed_curry|REMEMBER ED CURRY!] @ iwethey
PGP key: 1024D/B524687C 2003-08-05
Fingerprint: E1D3 E3D7 5850 957E FED0  2B3A ED66 6971 B524 687C
Alternate Fingerprint: 09F9 1102 9D74  E35B D841 56C5 6356 88C0
New Don't forget Bob
A positive attitude may not solve all your problems, but it will annoy enough people to make it worth the effort. (Herm Albright)
New Fortunately, I was never exposed to it.
Alex

When fascism comes to America, it'll be wrapped in a flag and carrying a cross. -- Sinclair Lewis
New No they're not.
They will try to scare a few companies into giving them protection money, but as a convicted abusive monopolist they have to watch their step even there - they could easily be sued for casting a cloud over someone else's business.

Meanwhile SCO has caused the FOSS community to hone it's claws. Microsoft says they can't reveal the patents because FOSS would retaliate - in other words they are fully aware their patents don't stand a chance if challenged.

A system is prepared to find prior art and another system with counter-patents. Groklaw will expose every attempted deception to the light of day.

And the Supreme Court has just pulled the rug out from under "trivial" patents.

And should things get tight for Linux, waiting in the wings is a very large blue company that has a lot bet on Linux. This large blue company has a "significant" team of very polite, very patient, but very persistent and insanely competent lawyers, popularly known as the Nazgul.

And more patents than God.

I do not doubt that Microsoft's lawyers have nightmares about this large blue company pulling out a patent covering "Using a computer to write software programs".
[link|http://www.aaxnet.com|AAx]
New Yes. Except...
In your recent response:
And more patents than God.

I do not doubt that Microsoft's lawyers have nightmares about this large blue company pulling out a patent covering "Using a computer to write software programs".
That patent is going to be more along the lines of: "Using a computer in ON mode vs OFF mode." or "A computer reads 1s and 0s as defined by God." both being Circa 1960.

One can only hope.
--
[link|mailto:greg@gregfolkert.net|greg],
[link|http://www.iwethey.org/ed_curry|REMEMBER ED CURRY!] @ iwethey
PGP key: 1024D/B524687C 2003-08-05
Fingerprint: E1D3 E3D7 5850 957E FED0  2B3A ED66 6971 B524 687C
Alternate Fingerprint: 09F9 1102 9D74  E35B D841 56C5 6356 88C0
New There's only so deep they can go . . .
. . because logic gates were invented by, and named "gates" by, one Nikola Tesla, who was not employed by a large blue company at the time.
[link|http://www.aaxnet.com|AAx]
New That would be the OTHER Big Giant Corp not being MS...
in the Patent World.
--
[link|mailto:greg@gregfolkert.net|greg],
[link|http://www.iwethey.org/ed_curry|REMEMBER ED CURRY!] @ iwethey
PGP key: 1024D/B524687C 2003-08-05
Fingerprint: E1D3 E3D7 5850 957E FED0  2B3A ED66 6971 B524 687C
Alternate Fingerprint: 09F9 1102 9D74  E35B D841 56C5 6356 88C0
New "logic roots in weaving loom" gets 500k hits
And a 'gate' could well be a ~equivalent concept, re separating weft from warp - starting with Jacquard.

Seems to me that - digital logic just may prove the undoing of the whole 'pseudo-science of the law'[Fred Rodell, Harvard Law Sch.], via the focus on patents: the arbitrariness of "expected lifetimes" of "inventors" VS overall societal costs (perhaps relating that 'cost' to premature deaths .. even of ... the little kiddies.)

Not that bipeds are any nearer to achieving scale and relativity, or facing this humongous muddle of duelling interests, as an ingredient, say -- in all this, 'let's keep the temperature down!' (mere survival stuff.)

We are soo funny. Pi to a trillion places / and a shitty public health delivery system / then, The Hum-Vee as 'status symbol'.

I can't wait for the debate on origins of [link|http://www.fibtex.lodz.pl/absten47.htm| fuzzy logic].

cf. "Velocity Control of Weft Insertion on Air Jet Looms by Fuzzy Logic"

New Remember that anti-trust trumps patent
A company can be stopped from enforcing its patents or have strict limits put on how it licenses them if it violates anti-trust law. For example, see Rambus.

--Tony
New Hasn't stopped Microsoft from Biatchin' about Samba.
--
[link|mailto:greg@gregfolkert.net|greg],
[link|http://www.iwethey.org/ed_curry|REMEMBER ED CURRY!] @ iwethey
PGP key: 1024D/B524687C 2003-08-05
Fingerprint: E1D3 E3D7 5850 957E FED0  2B3A ED66 6971 B524 687C
Alternate Fingerprint: 09F9 1102 9D74  E35B D841 56C5 6356 88C0
New Tim Bray (Sun employee... err yeah), in his Blog.
[link|http://www.tbray.org/ongoing/When/200x/2007/05/13/Four-Words|Four words for Microsoft]

Quote:
Litigate or shut up.
Oh yeah, baby.



--
[link|mailto:greg@gregfolkert.net|greg],
[link|http://www.iwethey.org/ed_curry|REMEMBER ED CURRY!] @ iwethey
PGP key: 1024D/B524687C 2003-08-05
Fingerprint: E1D3 E3D7 5850 957E FED0  2B3A ED66 6971 B524 687C
Alternate Fingerprint: 09F9 1102 9D74  E35B D841 56C5 6356 88C0
New Linus agrees
[link|http://www.informationweek.com/news/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=199600443|Article]

Microsoft should name the patents that it claims have been violated so the claims can be tested in court or so open-source developers can rewrite code to avoid the violation, Torvalds wrote.

"Naming them would make it either clear that Linux isn't infringing at all (which is quite possible, especially if the patents are bad), or would make it possible to avoid infringing by coding around whatever silly thing they claim," he said.


Put up or shut up.

Unfortunately, Mr. CIO evalutes this as potential risk when reviewing projects. Were I not somewhat informed as to the history here, I would think twice about going a route where the potential vendor could be sued into oblivion by one of the most powerful companies in the world. And that's what uSoft's game plan is, I wot. Cast enough FUD to cause decision-makers to think twice and go with their products cuz it's 'safer'. I'd wager that they don't have any real intentions to sue.
--
Steve
[link|http://www.ubuntulinux.org|Ubuntu]
New Microsoft blinked.
[link|http://tech.blorge.com/Structure:%20/2007/05/15/microsoft-will-not-sue-linux-for-patent-violations/|Uhh, yeah sorry about that.]

IOW, FUD is what they want. Vapor-ware^H^H^H^Hlawsuit.

I believe they mucked up. They should have been the first to sue, rather than the bungling SCOg. Then they MIGHT have had a chance to get something done.

Now, its toast.
--
[link|mailto:greg@gregfolkert.net|greg],
[link|http://www.iwethey.org/ed_curry|REMEMBER ED CURRY!] @ iwethey
PGP key: 1024D/B524687C 2003-08-05
Fingerprint: E1D3 E3D7 5850 957E FED0  2B3A ED66 6971 B524 687C
Alternate Fingerprint: 09F9 1102 9D74  E35B D841 56C5 6356 88C0
     Well, now we know. It *is* going to use patent... - (folkert) - (30)
         Wow...kernel violates 42 different patents - (bepatient) - (10)
             pretty funny as well as the NT Kernel - (boxley) - (9)
                 Huh? [Insert perplexed dog picture here] -NT - (altmann) - (8)
                     here - (boxley) - (7)
                         Umm - (altmann) - (6)
                             it does, maybe I need a better source -NT - (boxley) - (5)
                                 links - (boxley)
                                 links - (boxley) - (3)
                                     Re: links - (altmann) - (2)
                                         mac osx of course sits on top of mach - (boxley) - (1)
                                             WhatEVar. - (pwhysall)
         How do you spell "irrelevant"? - (mmoffitt)
         Looks like a repeat of SCOSource - (JayMehaffey) - (2)
             This is a clear civil RICO case -NT - (boxley)
             Its a very dangerous game - (bepatient)
         To quote an idiot, "Bring it on!" - (a6l6e6x) - (4)
             xenix had a lot of good innovation -NT - (boxley) - (1)
                 Yes, but what did they do with it? -NT - (folkert)
             Don't forget Bob -NT - (jbrabeck) - (1)
                 Fortunately, I was never exposed to it. -NT - (a6l6e6x)
         No they're not. - (Andrew Grygus) - (6)
             Yes. Except... - (folkert) - (3)
                 There's only so deep they can go . . . - (Andrew Grygus) - (2)
                     That would be the OTHER Big Giant Corp not being MS... - (folkert)
                     "logic roots in weaving loom" gets 500k hits - (Ashton)
             Remember that anti-trust trumps patent - (tonytib) - (1)
                 Hasn't stopped Microsoft from Biatchin' about Samba. -NT - (folkert)
         Tim Bray (Sun employee... err yeah), in his Blog. - (folkert) - (2)
             Linus agrees - (Steve Lowe) - (1)
                 Microsoft blinked. - (folkert)

Here he comes, here comes Speed Racer.
103 ms