[Gllug] More Microsoft patents

[Mike Brodbelt]

On Tue, 2003-02-11 at 22:23, rich at annexia.org wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 12, 2003 at 09:35:45AM +1300, Jonathan Harker wrote:
> > http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1104-984052.html
> > 
> > What does this mean for Mono?
> 
> Nothing. This patent is absurd - it's an attempt to use patent
> law to cover the "look-and-feel" copyright cases which were so
> unsuccessful in the 80s.

Most software patents are absurd, but they have very significant
chilling effects nonetheless. One just has to look at Apple's patents on
TrueType byte hinting as an example. They found a small loophole in
patent law so they could get a typeface considered as a program, and a a
result, I'm now running a build of OpenOffice with a statically linked
freetype with byte hinting off. This despite the fact that I live in a
country which does not respect US software patents - the OOO developers
seem to feel we should all suffer under the idiocy started in the US.*
 
> Of course this is not to say that the USPTO has granted it, which
> is itself quite absurd. 

The USPTO has granted more than one patent on inventions which are
impossible, For a laugh, go look for the one that claims it can compress
any arbitrary data. Depite it having been pointed out that this was
mathematically impossible, the patent is still there.
 
> But if the Mono blokes have any guts at all they will ignore this
> patent and continue developing as if nothing had happened.

Even if the patent has no substance, Ximian et al probably couldn't
afford to fight it, and Mono wouldn't get many corporate users if its
legality were questionable.

Mike.

* Yes, I could rebuild it, but it's a major pain, given the way it's
been packaged.


-- 
Gllug mailing list  -  Gllug at linux.co.uk
http://list.ftech.net/mailman/listinfo/gllug