What is Digg?Sponsored by newegg
Tips to be first in line without camping out in the cold! view!
newegg.com - The Pre-Black Friday Sale. No Lines, No Crowds; Click and Save in the comfort of your own home.
237 Comments
- openguru, on 10/18/2007, -10/+141Software Patents sucks!!
- joelito, on 10/14/2007, -1/+93Just how long have multiple workspaces been in X11 window managers?
- autoatsakiklis, on 10/14/2007, -8/+74New Microsoft's plan
1. Tell that Redhat infriges patents.
2. Pay money to someone to sue Redhat and Novell.
3. Defend Novell and advertise their "protection".
4. Profit - inactive, on 10/15/2007, -2/+63SCO part 2
- fuckinhell, on 10/15/2007, -0/+57If the torpedo runs Windows I don't think they would have much to worry about.
- natedouglas, on 10/14/2007, -2/+50Software patents are *****.
Doesn't Xerox PARC or whoever is behind this lose points for not enforcing their ***** all these years? (ie, like a most intellectual property rights I've read about, where you *have* to aggressively pursue violations or risk losing control of it) - neognostic, on 10/15/2007, -0/+37You would have to "reboat" it before firing, and then because the torpedo is so bloated, it would run out of fuel before reaching the target.
- Philluminati, on 10/14/2007, -8/+43This is what we've always expected. Microsoft versus Linux (well, xfree86 and KDE? so technically not Linux).
Looks like Microsoft are going to "show us the code / patents" one at a time for next x number of years. It's a good thing we can shrug this off and say "I don't care". You can't sink Linux no matter how hard you try. - ToadLeg, on 10/15/2007, -1/+32Can someone who knows what that patent means explain it? It looks to me like it's a patent for anything visible on a desktop, with fancy "a first linking data structure linking the first workspace data structure to the display object means and a second linking data structure" language to distract from what it is really about: displaying objects on a desktop. Surely the idea of displaying objects on a screen was not new in 1991 or even 1987, and if you can patent something as inane as the idea of displaying things, I want to file for the patent of the wheel.
- deroderugridder, on 10/14/2007, -11/+406 days untill Ubuntu Gutsy Gibbon comes out -- So long *****
- BrandonMills, on 10/15/2007, -13/+41You've got to be freaking kidding me. X11 has had that for how long before Windows? Ridiculous!
- JonForTheWin, on 10/14/2007, -0/+28This torpedo is about to explode, cancel or allow?
- geeshock, on 10/13/2007, -1/+26"Suse Linex" now huh?
- Altotus, on 10/15/2007, -0/+25The patent doesn't cover multiple workplaces, it covers having the same window being associated with multiple workspaces at once. This sort of thing has been available since vtwm and olvwm (ca. 1990) and has been available as a feature of the underlying GUI (X) for several years prior to the use of it in Window managers. For example, while it was little used, the Amiga Intuition library had a way of doing what is described in this patent back in 1985.
I would assume, but don't know for certain, that something similar existed at CMU. Note that this patent was filed by Xerox in 1987.
Of course, who knows what the outcome will be. From the standpoint of RedHat, they'd need only disable sticky Windows in their X server. - Jugalator, on 10/15/2007, -2/+25I agree. The copyright laws are enough to protect intellectual property IMHO. I mean, you can still not rip out someone's code -- that's already protected by those laws. What these do are patenting ideas. As in a food recipe (source code) where the idea of adding yeast to make bread could be patented. Now no one can make bread, even different bread that's not at all using the other recipe. Idiocy. How are these laws exactly promoting software innovation?
- VargVikernes, on 10/14/2007, -1/+22That's pretty much the biggest problem with software patents. Say you're company X and make something really cool and company Y rips it off. You wait until company Y make billions with this and then sure them. The were numerous cases like this in the past.
Imagine Xerox waiting 30 years and starting to sue everyone over their mouse patent? In theory, this is possible. - dinostabOMG, on 10/15/2007, -0/+20Blue Screen of Reprieve from Death
- R3j3ct, on 10/15/2007, -1/+20Simply put, microsoft created a company to make this lawsuit so they do not get bad public rep from it...
- vishzilla, on 10/13/2007, -3/+21totally bogus, another devious scheme by "ex"-Microsoft employees.
- edzilla, on 10/14/2007, -3/+21Thank god we don't have those useless software patent in europe...
- neognostic, on 10/15/2007, -0/+18I'm going to patent clouds, they are new every few days so no prior ownership. When it rains on crops, they will have to pay me. I'm driving on easy street now!
- dinostabOMG, on 10/13/2007, -0/+17I looked at the patent, lunk from the article... and it's issued to Xerox! Now, we all know that the GUI was more or less their idea, and that Bill and Steve already pilfered it, but I don't see how Linux-based desktop OSes are any more or less guilty than Mac and Windows in this respect. So why do we hear so much mudslinging about this from Microsoft? Isn't the hypocrisy a little too obvious, even for them?
- sirhomer, on 10/14/2007, -0/+17It's always helpful to research what you are suing before you file a lawsuit.
- inactive, on 10/13/2007, -0/+17Im going to patent Electricity.....
- dinostabOMG, on 10/13/2007, -1/+18You forgot ?????.
- yodaj007, on 10/13/2007, -4/+20You can't sink Linux no matter how hard you try.
Not true. Get the top Linux developers, say a few thousand, put them on a boat, and sink it with a torpedo running Microsoft Windows. - Megatog615, on 10/14/2007, -2/+17I should patent the Hello World application. Can you imagine how much money you'd make with such a patent?
- Chicken001, on 10/12/2007, -0/+15THIS IS MADNESS!
- pendrachken, on 10/14/2007, -0/+15It would run Vista, look pretty as hell and be so bloated by hardware requirements that the payload would be a firecracker....
- notque, on 10/15/2007, -2/+16This has everything to do with Microsoft.
IP Innovation LLC is a subsidiary of Acacia, and Acacia recently appointed Brad Brunell, who worked for 16 years at Microsoft as general manager, intellectual property licensing. He's now a senior vice president. Other ex-Microsoft executives have also recently migrated to Acacia.
Acacia are known as patent trolls. - m3t00, on 10/14/2007, -0/+14After retrieving the unexploded torpedo and plugging a monitor into it they were stunned to see:
You don't currently have permission to detonate this torpedo. Click continue to complete this operation. Continue/Skip/Cancel - WhiteHamster, on 10/13/2007, -0/+13its always ***** like "multiple workspaces" "icons" or ***** "showing images on a screen" ***** stupid ass system
- ggoyal, on 10/14/2007, -0/+12Problem is Xerox is not suing. Its a patent troll company "IP innovations", now managed by an ex-Microsoft employee which is in the business of acquiring patents and then suing companies which it considers are violating those. The original inventors are not involved with this case and do not stand to gain.
- dattaway, on 10/15/2007, -0/+12"I'm a programmer, not a patent lawyer damnit!"
- notque, on 10/13/2007, -0/+12But tell this story right.
A California inventor moves his California shell company to Nevada, and then joins up with another California company, using an Illinois shell, to buy patents from Xerox and then assert them against a California company, a North Carolina company and a Massachusetts company. In Marshall, Texas. - snotrokit, on 10/14/2007, -2/+13and if it doesn't work (again e.g. SCO) be far enough away from it to walk away clean and let your legal trollhenchman die in flames.
- dougsk, on 10/13/2007, -0/+11I agree with your second sentence, to a point. The Groklaw article clearly states the parent company of IP Innovation hired two former high profile MS employees. However MS has had a multiple workspaces for years.
Webpage:
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/downloads/power ...
Download
http://download.microsoft.com/download/whistler/In ... - inactive, on 10/15/2007, -5/+16What does it have to do with Windows? It's "IP Innovation LLC" who is suing, like they sued Apple who payed up to shut them up.
And Windows, being stuck in the old ages still DOES NOT still have multiple workspaces.
RTFA! - Megatog615, on 10/21/2007, -1/+11THIS. IS. LINUX!
- notque, on 10/15/2007, -2/+11They released powertools that do. Infringement.
- Freschel, on 10/12/2007, -4/+13This is a duplicate story (same Groklaw link) of another one already dugg on the front page a few hours ago :
http://digg.com/linux_unix/Linux_vs_Patents_first_ ... - JasonCox, on 10/14/2007, -18/+27Kids, RTFA. Microsoft isnt suing them. Yes there are former 'softies at said company, but there also former 'softies working at Novell, IBM, Google, Apple and even Mozilla to name a few.
(and for those who dont know, Windows has supported multiple desktops since Windows NT, it's just never been shipped turn on out-of-the-box) - nhnFreespirit, on 10/13/2007, -1/+10I don't agree with software patents at all (And I will explain why ) and I don't agree with your view on this issue.
IANAL and all that, but this is how I understand the issue.
There are a number of problems with the view you take. Most generally that you treat software patents as a simple extension on patents on physical products. This does not work. With a regular patent, you gain a limited monopoly on a way of accomplishing something. This means, that if I can find another way of achieving the same goal, it is not covered by your patent. As software is basically mathematics, it is based purely on abstract ideas, as soon as a patent is taken out it coves not the _way_ of achieving something, but the outcome itself. In this way, a software patent can actually artificially block an entire area of inventions, where a regular patent would just force people to work around it. THIS is in my opinion the real danger of software patents.
Now, you say that it is unfair to the patent holders if I take their product, reverse engineer it and release it as my own. Only, that is rarely what happens. I develop software as a one man operation (In a country where software patents luckily does not exist). I can guarantee you that I do not try to copy features from other sources. Now, if I had to make sure that every little feature I implement is not covered by a patent, I would be working day and night, 7 days a week and _never_ write a single line of code! Software patents kill innovation! Then you might argue that many of these patents are trivial and should not have been awarded. The problem is that this requires a court case, something small developers do not have the resources to see through.
Now, in this case, we have a company producing absolutely nothing of value (which is practical, as it limits the chances of being counter sued) suing over an ancient patent they have bought. Worse, the stuff they are apparently suing over has been implemented in _every_ major operating (with the exception of Windows) system going back at least 20 years.
Some claim that this is the price of doing business, but if that is the case, I would argue that, as patents were instigated to benefit all of society, it is time to take a long hard look at what the macro effects of software patents are today. I still claim that they kill innovation faster than pretty much anything else I can think of. - neognostic, on 10/14/2007, -2/+11The concept of 1+1=2 is mystifying to you?
- ypSami, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9When it runs out of fuel and sinks, does that count as a crash?
- Sketchcast, on 10/14/2007, -1/+10Or in Russia, or China, or India, or any other nation that is going to be relevant two decades from now. I could fully see the USA becoming the sole island of Microsoft users thirty years from now when the rest of the world is using GNU/Linux.
- dbalaski, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9Ah Its a mark of the times -- the devil's next and more sophisticated battle ground -- litigation!
But that is only worth it if there is $$$ to be had -- Red Hat & Novel have deep pockets and are prominent players in Enterprise commercial OSs
(which explains why BSD, Ubuntu et al have not been named in the suites ) -- they stand a chance on hitting the commercial market and getting it scared.
It may not be the exact ploy by microsoft, but it is suspect. - Philluminati, on 10/12/2007, -3/+11dude open your ***** eyes. Why would two employees move from MS (one being an IP expert) straight to the Trolling company a week before the lawsuit was announced? I'll tell you why, because they are STILL bidding to do work on Microsoft's behalf. why the ***** would 2 random employees protect Microsofts patent claims unless there was something still there?
Bill gates probably said "if you help support our troll company with your expertise in this area, we'll indirectly give you both $20,000 payrises. We've done the paperwork and they are expecting you. You'll be like an MS employee in another office. When the case is over we've give you both your jobs back here + bonuses".
It's so obvious - Altotus, on 10/15/2007, -0/+8Trademarks are the only "intellectual proerty" that you need to police in order to not lose control over it. Copyright and patent holders have no such requirement and it's generally of benefit to them not to aggressively do so.
- inactive, on 10/13/2007, -1/+8Red Hat and Novell are the most profitable and most used in businesses. To scare people away from Linux, scare them away from Red Hat and Novell.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 239 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is