|
|
|
Get your copy of M$ Word while you still can
Showing all messages in thread #1250642301
Windows 98 Annoyances Discussion Forum
The following are all of the messages in this thread (7 in all), shown in chronological order. Click any message subject to view that message by itself or to view the thread hierarchy.
|
Get your copy of M$ Word while you still can
Tuesday, August 18, 2009 at 5:38 pm
Posted by gewg_
(4444 messages posted)
The story so far:
After September 11, 2001, Federal law enforcement agencies needed a way
to parse huge piles of documents to extract the terrorism-looking stuff.
A company called i4i came up with a way to do this.
They developed an app and received a patent for their technique.
Microsoft (being fully aware of i4i) knew the technique was patented
but decided to include it in M$ Word without paying royalties.
(This is called "willful infringement" and carries an additional stigma.)
NOTE: There is a whole separate story re: ISO and M$'s "OOXML"
which is so corrupt that it makes this story look like Mary Poppins.
http://google.com/search?q=defectivebydesign+OOXML+ISO
WRT M$ Word documents, i4i's market for their tool went to zero
and they filed a patent infringement suit against M$.
At this point, M$ *could* have treated i4i as they would like to be treated
by licensing the technology and settling up their debt. **M$ refused**.
The suit was filed in the Federal Court in Eastern Texas
(which is infamously friendly to "intellectual property" plaintiffs).
A verdict in the case was rendered recently against M$ with a fine of $200M.
During the trial, M$'s lawyers compared i4i's lawsuit to gov't bailouts.
The judge told them to discontinue that tactic. They persisted.
When rendering the verdict, the judge added $40M (out of M$'s pocket)
for the contempt that M$'s lawyers showed him.
He also added $50M for the willful infringement of M$'s corporate officers
for a total of $290M (less than 2 day's earnings for M$ in 2008).
To remedy the actions that brought about the case,
the judge ordered (effective 60 days hence)
that M$ will have to stop shipping infringing versions of M$ Word.
This means that M$ will have to pull the disks and stop all downloads;
the plug-ins available for previous versions must be discontinued as well.
Computer vendors will also have to stop installing M$ Word.
In order to sell M$ Word after that,
M$ will have to remove the feature or arrange licencing terms for it.
In its usual "we're above the law" way,
Microsoft has filed an "emergency motion" to continue shipping their products.
A decision hasn't been rendered. (I wouldn't hold my breath on that one.)
On a related note, i4i has stated that the XML techniques in OpenOffice.org
do *NOT* violate their patent.
(OpenOffice is Free Software.)
...and a final item from me: SOFTWARE
PATENTS SUCK
(as do most "intellectual property" laws these days).
With any luck, the US Supreme Court will uphold the Bilski verdict
(a completely different case from i4i's)
cache
of http://www.techjournalsouth.com/news/article.html?item_id=6466
and we'll be done with most of this nonsense.
[Reply or follow-up to this message]
| |
re: Get your copy of M$ Word while you still can
Tuesday, August 18, 2009 at 9:49 pm
Posted by bob wells
(1636 messages posted)
Windows 98?????????
On Tuesday, August 18, 2009 at 5:38 pm, gewg_ wrote:
>The story so far:
>
>After September 11, 2001, Federal law enforcement agencies needed a way
>to parse huge piles of documents to extract the terrorism-looking stuff.
>A company called i4i came up with a way to do this.
>They developed an app and received a patent for their technique.
>
>Microsoft (being fully aware of i4i) knew the technique was patented
>but decided to include it in M$ Word without paying royalties.
>(This is called "willful infringement" and carries an additional stigma.)
>
>NOTE: There is a whole separate story re: ISO and M$'s "OOXML"
>which is so corrupt that it makes this story look like Mary Poppins.
>http://google.com/search?q=defectivebydesign+OOXML+ISO
>
>WRT M$ Word documents, i4i's market for their tool went to zero
>and they filed a patent infringement suit against M$.
>At this point, M$ *could* have treated i4i as they would like to be treated
>by licensing the technology and settling up their debt. **M$ refused**.
>The suit was filed in the Federal Court in Eastern Texas
>(which is infamously friendly to "intellectual property" plaintiffs).
>A verdict in the case was rendered recently against M$ with a fine of $200M.
>
>During the trial, M$'s lawyers compared i4i's lawsuit to gov't bailouts.
>The judge told them to discontinue that tactic. They persisted.
>When rendering the verdict, the judge added $40M (out of M$'s pocket)
>for the contempt that M$'s lawyers showed him.
>He also added $50M for the willful infringement of M$'s corporate officers
>for a total of $290M (less than 2 day's earnings for M$ in 2008).
>
>To remedy the actions that brought about the case,
>the judge ordered (effective 60 days hence)
>that M$ will have to stop shipping infringing versions of M$ Word.
>This means that M$ will have to pull the disks and stop all downloads;
>the plug-ins available for previous versions must be discontinued as well.
>Computer vendors will also have to stop installing M$ Word.
>
>In order to sell M$ Word after that,
>M$ will have to remove the feature or arrange licencing terms for it.
>In its usual "we're above the law" way,
>Microsoft has filed an "emergency motion" to continue shipping their products.
>A decision hasn't been rendered. (I wouldn't hold my breath on that one.)
>
>On a related note, i4i has stated that the XML techniques in OpenOffice.org
>do *NOT* violate their patent.
>(OpenOffice is Free Software.)
>
>...and a final item from me: SOFTWARE
>PATENTS SUCK
>(as do most "intellectual property" laws these days).
>
>With any luck, the US Supreme Court will uphold the Bilski verdict
>(a completely different case from i4i's)
>cache
>of http://www.techjournalsouth.com/news/article.html?item_id=6466
>and we'll be done with most of this nonsense.
[Reply or follow-up to this message]
|
re: Get your copy of M$ Word while you still can
Wednesday, August 19, 2009 at 1:44 am
Posted by Arminius
(334 messages posted)
It makes me wonder what the people running Microsoft are thinking.
Is software "patented" or "copyrighted"?
Patents run out after 17 years, copyright is supposed to last a 100.
[Reply or follow-up to this message]
|
re: Get your copy of M$ Word while you still can
Wednesday, August 19, 2009 at 11:07 am
Posted by gewg_
(4444 messages posted)
Arminius wrote:
|It makes me wonder what the people running Microsoft are thinking.
|
As always: "Money, money, money..." and "We can game the system".
...and to Bob:
This is all about the vendors you choose to support and their business models.
It is NOT an issue isolated to 1 product line.
M$ has also made threatening overtures to Free/Open Source Software
by stating that FOSS projects are infringing on numerous M$ patents
but **M$ NEVER SPECIFIES _WHICH_ PATENTS**. (See "submarine patents".)
|Is software "patented" or "copyrighted"?
|
Well, with EITHER paradigm, you should be expected to PUBLISH.
Books that are allowed to go out of print
*should* go into the Public Domain in short order.[1]
In the tech domain, abandonware that isn't already under a copyleft
license
should also go into the Public Domain.
If you've ever seen a patent application,
you'll notice that a drawing of the gizmo figures prominently in that.
The equivalent of that for software SHOULD be a source code listing.
Just as an application without an exacting mechanical drawing is rejected,
an application without a source code listing should be rejected.
Patents are *supposed* to be about a *process* to do something new or better.
If you clicked my SOFTWARE PATENTS SUCK link,
you'd see that the Bilski case revolves around the notion that
the software needs to be INTEGRAL to the process
and if you can pluck out the software and *replace* it with something else
then what you have ISN'T a unique process worthy of a patent.
|Patents run out after 17 years, copyright is supposed to last a 100.
|
The perversion of both (obvious stuff with existing exemplars in the case of patents
and the Mickey-Mouse-must-never-go-into-the-Public-Domain thing
in the case of copyright) spits on the Founding Fathers' original vision:
"The Congress shall have Power [. . .] To promote the Progress of Science
and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors
the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries
cache
of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_copyright_law#History
(Article I, Section 8, Clause 8 of the Constitution of the United States)
Disney and Microsoft, to cite 2 high-profile examples,
have given the USA the appearance of a banana republic.
With the increasing dexterity which modern technology affords creators
(making the production of new works ever EASIER),
the platform of the Pirate Party of Sweden
increasingly makes more sense that the current (horribly broken) system.
cache
of http://www.piratpartiet.se/international/english
With Piratpartiet's sucess in the last round of elections,
http://news.slashdot.org/article.pl?threshold=5&sid=09/06/07/2044217
it's obvious that this nascent movement is on the right track.
Even where they aren't the *victor* in the contest,
their existance forces the opposition to actually **confront** the issues.
[1] One of the great travesties of our current "Intellectual Property" laws
is the nitrate film stock that is lying around and turning to sludge
because the rights holders won't step up and do the needed preservation work.
Anyone else who *does* make the effort stands to lose any rights
when, after he does, the "owner" pops up out of the shadows.
In the tech domain, an analog of this is "submarine patents".
[Reply or follow-up to this message]
|
re: Get your copy of M$ Word while you still can
Wednesday, August 19, 2009 at 5:11 pm
Posted by Arminius
(334 messages posted)
||It makes me wonder what the people running Microsoft are thinking.
||
|As always: "Money, money, money..." and "We can game the system".
Yeah sure, but surely they must have consulted their legal team before they went
ahead with infringing on i4i's patent. The lawyers should have pointed out to Microsoft
execs they were in the wrong and could not win this case.
[Reply or follow-up to this message]
|
re: Get your copy of M$ Word while you still can
Wednesday, August 19, 2009 at 11:30 pm
Posted by gewg_
(4444 messages posted)
Arminius wrote:
|||It makes me wonder what the people running Microsoft are thinking.
gewg_ wrote:
||As always: "Money, money, money..." and "We can game the system".
Arminius wrote:
|Yeah sure, but surely they must have consulted their legal team
|before they went ahead with infringing on i4i's patent.
|
Without a doubt.
|The lawyers should have pointed out to Microsoft execs they were in the wrong
|and could not win this case.
|
I'm sure the lawyers pointed out every angle they could imagine.
...then there are the corporate officers.
http://google.com/search?q=define:hubris
When you get away with criminal behavior for a long time,
you start to think you're bulletproof.
The bureaucrats carry significant blame here. Thanks, Dubya. Thanks, Congress.
...and as I mentioned, it's less than 2 day's income for M$.
Whippings that don't actually sting are worse than useless:
cache
of http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/2004/pulpit_20040401_000807.html
...and maybe Ballmer & Co. find this stuff more stimulating than Las Vegas.
[Reply or follow-up to this message]
|
UPDATE: Get your copy of M$ Word while you still can
Thursday, December 24, 2009 at 1:33 pm
Posted by gewg_
(4444 messages posted)
gewg_ wrote:
|the judge ordered (effective 60 days hence)
|that M$ will have to stop shipping infringing versions of M$ Word.
|
Way back then, an appellate court issued a stay on that 60-day order.
The court has now decided that after January 11, 2010
M$ must abide by the original ruling.
Redmond still owes i4i $290,000,000.
M$ is making noises that they might take this to the Supreme Court.
Of course, that assumes that SCOTUS won't decide *this* case first
http://google.com/search?q="in.re.Bilski"
and that they will decide software patents[1] are unconstitutional.
...and all of this ignores the fact that OOXML is a HORRIBLE "standard"
cache
of http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/04/21/1821251#23150806
with a huge amount of skulduggery involved in its "fast track" ISO approval
cache
of http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/08/28/1237255#20383881
and I mean A LOT of scummy practices
cache
of http://www.robweir.com/blog/2008/01/you-are-here.html
...and the whole "Custom XML" thing is mostly overrated anyway.
cache
of http://www.tbray.org/ongoing/When/200x/2009/12/22/On-Custom-XML
It now appears that M$ will simply remove OOXML from M$Word
after having broken so many laws to get that badly broken format kick-started.
For Win98 users this means
that you will have less of a chance of receiving an (unreadable) *.DOCX,
since that file format was made the default of Save in M$Office 2007
(i.e. yet again invoking the infamous M$ Forced Upgrade Cycle).
[1] ...when the software is not integral to a hardware invention.
[Reply or follow-up to this message]
| |
| |
Tip: Use one of the [Reply or follow-up to this message] links above to add a message to this thread
| |
Return to the Windows 98 Discussion Forum
|
|
|
|
