Slashdot Mirror

Could be a microsoft insider taking out retribution for AMD going GPLv3: http://digitaltippingpoint.com/?q=node/132

Macs are not really more expensive than PCs anymore. What you are comparing is the software. There's quite a lot of free or cheap software for the Mac. Unity3D, for example, is $199 and compares well with $10,000 engines for windos. iDVD or iMovie are free with the machine and might serve your purpose for the movie. And so on. What Linux does offer is bringing computing to people who really couldn't afford a computer otherwise, because it runs on machines that XP wouldn't even boot on. But that's the very low end. In the consumer market, I don't think the difference is that big.

First, some basic questions as to measuring Linux installs. Very hard. No bar-code events in many cases.

The other problem that I have with this guy's article is that it is contrary to recent reports even here on /. about the really stunning popularity of Linux AND Mac sales on Amazon. Also, there is a totally different distribution chain. Macs are sold in stores or on-line. Linux is often distributed through social networks, such as the telecentros in Sao Paulo, Brazil and Extremadura, Spain; or in thin client networks such as at this public middle school in San Francisco; or via free giveaways, such as this guy who gave out 16,000 Linux computers in Berkeley, California; or via the numerous municipal and national migration projects to Linux, such as in Munich, Madrid, and Extremadura Spain; or via Nokia's N880; or the OLPC; or the Asus EEE PC, or the Everex PC.

It is a totally different business model. The fundamental problem with TFA is that it does not understand this fundamental different.

...not. Same for Cinelerra and Kino and Jahshakah and Firefox and Wengophone and apt-get and dvgrab and transcode and ffmpeg2theora and Annodex and YouTube and Facebook and, oh well, you get the point.

As it so happens, I am producing a distributed film with FOSS called the Digital Tipping Point, and our community would never have been able to create all these great BASH scripts to automate the process of capturing, compressing, and uploading the video to the Internet Archive's Digital Tipping Point Video Collection without the freedom of FOSS. Oh, and coincidentally, neither the Internet or the Internet Archive would exist without FOSS.

This guy clearly does not know what he is talking about.

I would love to see any brand with non-x86 architecture again. If Dell is now supporting Linux and Solaris, the could bake a move and support modern CPUs in addition to the modern operating systems.

There are some advantages to x86, mostly price, but it's a case of finding the right tool for the job and for me much would benefit from sparc, ppc, cell or something else. Not that ubiquitous wi-fi or GPRS doesn't allow remote access, even X or thin clients, to remote hosts running the right architecture but it would be excellent to be able to find all that in a notebook, too.

Shoot. For many things, bringing back the 14" G3 iBook would do the job.

There is a list of 1,573 people who have decided to call Microsoft's bluff by signing a list offering to be the first ones to be sued by Microsoft for supposedly "infringing" Microsoft's 235 patents. Although I am a lawyer, I don't practice Intellectual Property law, and so I am not rendering a legal opinion on this area. But as a practical matter, I can tell you that whenever I sue someone, I first send them a letter demanding payment, and then if they don't pay in short order, I do sue them. I am too busy on a day-to-day basis bluffing people, and those who think that real lawyers with real claims bluff people, they are dead wrong. Some day, someone is going to call your bluff, and maybe even sue you for falsely claiming that you have a right against them, so I advise my clients to think carefully about claiming in public that they can sue someone if, in fact, they have no true claims.

In this particular case, mere common sense would tell most practicing attorneys that if Microsoft had valid claims, it would simply start rolling out the lawsuits and collecting money. Think of all the copies of OpenOffice.org and GNU Linux that are drifting around the world!!! If Microsoft had valid claims against those the users or their distros, dontcha think that they would file suit against a really solid test case, and then trot out that case for everyone else in the world to see? Of course they would.

Here is a link to page 13 of the list:

http://digitaltippingpoint.com/wiki/index.php?title=SMFM_list_page_13

So I am not buying Microsoft's questionable claims, and I have signed up for the list. Let's put an end to this questionable puffery! Microsoft, if you have a claim against me, sue me now, or shut up! You can serve me with a lawsuit here:

Christian J. Einfeldt
Law Offices of Christian J. Einfeldt
580 California Street, Suite 1600
San Francisco, CA 94104

In your complaint, Microsoft, you will want to specify which programs I am using. I am using openSUSE GNU Linux 10.2; Edgy Kubuntu; OpenOffice.org is my only office productivity suite, and so when you file suite against me, you might really want to stick a finger in my asking for an order barring me from using OpenOffice.org to write my reply briefs, because that is the tool I use for all my court briefs. I am also using Firefox, which you have heavily borrowed from, so please be sure to throw that in.

Oh, and I have installed about 100 copies of GNU Linux, OpenOffice.org and Firefox on various different computers for a public middle school in San Francisco, and I have also given out about 16 computers with those programs installed on them. So be sure to add a couple of causes of action for that, Brad Smith.

Hey, don't forget the fact that I started the "Sue Me First, Microsoft" list, where I very publicly questioned the veracity of your claims, so you would do well to add a couple of counts of defamation, since I am publicly calling into question both the veracity of your claims and your motivation for merely making a public fuss, without proving your claims.

But of course, I have nothing to worry about, because your claims probably are defeated by 1) obviousness; 2) prior art; and 3) limitations on patenting math. After all, if Microsoft could have patented 1 + 1 = 2, you would have done so, wouldn't you?

There is a list of 1,573 people who have decided to call Microsoft's bluff by signing a list offering to be the first ones to be sued by Microsoft for supposedly "infringing" Microsoft's 235 patents. Although I am a lawyer, I don't practice Intellectual Property law, and so I am not rendering a legal opinion on this area. But as a practical matter, I can tell you that whenever I sue someone, I first send them a letter demanding payment, and then if they don't pay in short order, I do sue them. I am too busy on a day-to-day basis bluffing people, and those who think that real lawyers with real claims bluff people, they are dead wrong. Some day, someone is going to call your bluff, and maybe even sue you for falsely claiming that you have a right against them, so I advise my clients to think carefully about claiming in public that they can sue someone if, in fact, they have no true claims.

In this particular case, mere common sense would tell most practicing attorneys that if Microsoft had valid claims, it would simply start rolling out the lawsuits and collecting money. Think of all the copies of OpenOffice.org and GNU Linux that are drifting around the world!!! If Microsoft had valid claims against those the users or their distros, dontcha think that they would file suit against a really solid test case, and then trot out that case for everyone else in the world to see? Of course they would.

Here is a link to page 13 of the list:

http://digitaltippingpoint.com/wiki/index.php?title=SMFM_list_page_13

So I am not buying Microsoft's questionable claims, and I have signed up for the list. Let's put an end to this questionable puffery! Microsoft, if you have a claim against me, sue me now, or shut up! You can serve me with a lawsuit here:

Christian J. Einfeldt
Law Offices of Christian J. Einfeldt
580 California Street, Suite 1600
San Francisco, CA 94104

In your complaint, Microsoft, you will want to specify which programs I am using. I am using openSUSE GNU Linux 10.2; Edgy Kubuntu; OpenOffice.org is my only office productivity suite, and so when you file suite against me, you might really want to stick a finger in my asking for an order barring me from using OpenOffice.org to write my reply briefs, because that is the tool I use for all my court briefs. I am also using Firefox, which you have heavily borrowed from, so please be sure to throw that in.

Oh, and I have installed about 100 copies of GNU Linux, OpenOffice.org and Firefox on various different computers for a public middle school in San Francisco, and I have also given out about 16 computers with those programs installed on them. So be sure to add a couple of causes of action for that, Brad Smith.

Hey, don't forget the fact that I started the "Sue Me First, Microsoft" list, where I very publicly questioned the veracity of your claims, so you would do well to add a couple of counts of defamation, since I am publicly calling into question both the veracity of your claims and your motivation for merely making a public fuss, without proving your claims.

But of course, I have nothing to worry about, because your claims probably are defeated by 1) obviousness; 2) prior art; and 3) limitations on patenting math. After all, if Microsoft could have patented 1 + 1 = 2, you would have done so, wouldn't you?

@PPH

IIRC, your earlier post asserted that representations made on the Sue Me First, Microsoft list risked exposing all 1,571 people on that list (latest count) to criminal exposure for making misrepresentations to US federal officials. I'm sure that the representations from your personal experience to which you are referring where in the context of bids made to the US federal government, or in the context of other business transactions to the government.

I'm probably not sticking my neck out on a limb here by saying that statements made on the "Sue Me First, Microsoft" list are not representations made "to" federal officials. So I'm still not clear why you are going on about this issue. Exactly who is exposed to criminal penalty, and for doing what?

At the present time, 1568 people from all over the globe have called Microsoft's bluff by signing up to be sued for "infringing" Microsoft's supposed "Intellectual Property" which is impacted by various open source technologies. If Microsoft does have valid claims, let them come forward with those claims. Otherwise, their validity of their claims are left gravely in doubt.

I mean, think about it. Consider the number of businesses uses FOSS today. The numbers are massive, and represent a huge paycheck for Microsoft, if it has valid claims. But since it probably has no valid claims, it is not going to press those specious claims for fear of losing, as did its proxy, SCO.

The URL is here:

http://digitaltippingpoint.com/wiki/index.php?title=SMFM_list_page_13

At the present time, 1568 people from all over the globe have called Microsoft's bluff by signing up to be sued for "infringing" Microsoft's supposed "Intellectual Property" which is impacted by various open source technologies. If Microsoft does have valid claims, let them come forward with those claims. Otherwise, their validity of their claims are left gravely in doubt.

I mean, think about it. Consider the number of businesses uses FOSS today. The numbers are massive, and represent a huge paycheck for Microsoft, if it has valid claims. But since it probably has no valid claims, it is not going to press those specious claims for fear of losing, as did its proxy, SCO.

The URL is here:

http://digitaltippingpoint.com/wiki/index.php?title=SMFM_list_page_13

Time to renew the Sue Me First wiki?

http://digitaltippingpoint.com/wiki/index.php?title=Sue_me_first%2C_microsoft

"In an interview with the Chicago Sun-Times, Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer says that Linux and the open source movement is "good competition" because it will "force [Microsoft] to be innovative," but calls Linux "a cancer that attaches itself in an intellectual property sense to everything it touches." He also says that the inclusion of IE in Windows has been "great ... for innovation in the software industry" (except for Netscape) and that MS's new copy protections are just "bumps in the road" to "help customers understand when they are crossing the line . . . so they can't do the wrong thing." And he says a few more amusing things, also."

I'd say that of the world's economies, there's more that believe in intellectual property today than ever. There are fewer communists in the world today than there were. There are some new modern-day sort of communists who want to get rid of the incentive for musicians and moviemakers and software makers under various guises. They don't think that those incentives should exist.

So are you saying the police should lock up this guy?

The article's main hypothesis is that piracy negates the price differential between Linux and Windows.

Specifically, one of the hypothesis towards the end of the article is that Microsoft unofficially acquiesced to piracy and maybe even encouraged it. Well, I thought I would point to Bill Gate's own words in the matter. In an article that I originally read on Cnet magazine, but that has since been commented and reprinted everywhere, he actually stated that piracy helps Microsoft by making the OS pervasive and that they were not worried about the Chinese pirating Windows, because if they are going to pirate "something", Microsoft and him would prefer that it be Windows.

"Then a comment made by Microsoft Founder, Chairman, and Chief Software Architect Bill Gates in 1998 and reprinted widely and often in the official media became a lightning rod for criticism of the software giant. Fortune magazine reported that, in a presentation to business students at an American university, Gates said rampant software piracy might turn out to be a positive thing for Microsoft.

"Although about three million computers get sold every year in China, people don't pay for the software," Gates reportedly said. "Someday they will, though. And as long as they're going to steal it, we want them to steal ours. They'll get sort of addicted, and then we'll somehow figure out how to collect sometime in the next decade."

Source: http://archives.cnn.com/2000/TECH/computing/02/23/ microsoft.china.idg/

And here's a more recent and yet more poignant articles and quotes from Bill Gates as it specifically mentions Linux.

Sources: http://www.digitaltippingpoint.com/?q=node/103
http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_arc hive/2007/07/23/100134488/index.htm
http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/ind ustry_sectors/technology/article2098235.ece
http://labnol.blogspot.com/2007/07/we-love-microso ft-software-piracy-in.html

I think the article would benefit tremendously from including the information above as it strengthens the author's main thesis a great deal.

130. Eric S. Raymond. Yes, Microsoft, the guy who's been harshing your mellow since I wrote The Cathedral and the Bazaar in 1997. Linux user since 1993, so I've been violating your nonexistent patents for fourteen years. Sue me first. Please, oh please! Because I don't think I've kicked your sorry asses enough yet, and I'd love another round with you chumps.

Steve O'Connor (Adelaide, Australia) BAD ME - I am using a pirated copy of Gentoo Linux that I illegally downloaded off the internet, and have installed on a whole rack of servers that I use to make money by providing information services to the Australian Defence Forces. I skipped out on paying any licence fees by doing it this way, and I have (illegal ?) access to all the source code, so I can hack my application around however I see fit. I have also ripped off a copy of PCLinuxOS from the internet (Which is like a HaXoRed version of Vista), without giving out my credit card, and used that same single copy to install on dozens of other computers. The recipients of these PCLinuxOS machines are way happy too ...

The list of people challenging Microsoft to sue them has now grown to 1,440. And that is just based on Steve Ballmer's comments that FOSS projects infringe on 235 patents. Imagine how people would react if Microsoft did actually file suit. It would be bedlam. The "Sue me first, Microsoft" list is here:

http://digitaltippingpoint.com/wiki/index.php?titl e=SMFM_list_page_12

Join the fun!! Sign up to get sued!! Look brave without taking any actual risk! (Microsoft ain't never gonna sue no one over its questionable patent claims against FOSS.)

At the risk of sounding corny, US President FDR had it right. The only thing to fear is fear itself. Microsoft has no colorable patent claims, IMHO, and I'm a lawyer. There are probably several good defenses to their patents: 1) prior art; 2) obviousness; 3) limits on patenting math. And right now there are 1,415 people who have signed a list asking Microsoft to sue them. We need business leaders to start signing this list, because plenty of grassroots people have signed the list already. You can find the sign-up page here:

http://digitaltippingpoint.com/wiki/index.php?titl e=SMFM_list_page_12

Of course, please consult with a lawyer if you are making serious plans to challenge Microsoft in court. Also, of course it goes without saying that you should probably consult other big players on the FOSS side, such as the Linux Foundation and the Open Innovation Network, etc. So while I can't give legal advice to anyone, really folks, I don't think there's any there there, to quote Gertude Stein. Just my two cents.

In fact, I believe that Microsoft is doing this patent stuff because they want to ease into distributing GNU Linux themselves, and they want to be the market leading GNU Linux distro. They really kind of are forced to do it. GNU Linux and FOSS are eroding their revenue base. They have read Clayton Christensen's work. They know what a disruptive innovation is. They know that the only market leaders to have survived disruptive innovations are those who spun off an independent separate little company that sold the disruptive products or services. As that spin-off grew, the companies who were smart enough to do it, like Quantum spun off Plus, eventually found that the disruptive little company grew to a point where the two companies could merge, and thus gracefully transition to the new disruptive market. Microsoft is planning to buy a distro, and they are insulating themselves from legal attack once they get there. They are also probably planning to try to bust the GPL in court, which is why they need this legal protection. They are looking to bust the GPL down to something that they like, such as a BSD or MIT or Apache-type license.

So in the meantime, let's make them earn their place. Let's challenge them. Let's unmask their FUD. Sign the list!

IMHO, Microsoft's patent claims lack merit, for several reasons: prior art; obviousness; and limits on patenting math. Let's turn up the volume on our doubt of Microsoft's claims. Please challenge Microsoft to sue you (yes, you AND your company) by signing this list of 1,395 people who doubt Microsoft's patent claims:

http://digitaltippingpoint.com/wiki/index.php?titl e=SMFM_list_page_11

"Royal Nonesuch" is a song from the 1974 musical film, Huckleberry Finn based on the book by Mark Twain. Like the song Royalty!, this song is also sung by Harvey Korman as "The King" (of France) and David Wayne as The Duke (of Bilgwater). Performing this song is the conartists' attempt to convince the town that they are travelling actors in possession of Shakespeare's lost masterpiece, The Royal Nonesuch. The conartists sell tickets to the unsuspecting town's people and exit, back stage with the all their money, without ever having given them a show, although, in the book, the dauphin runs around naked with only body paint on, and then convinces the people who watched this to pretend it was great to keep their pride after being tricked into seeing this.

For those of you who have not heard, there is a list of people who are challenging Microsoft to sue them if it believes that FOSS violates Microsoft patents. Many of the people on the list are not just individuals, but owners of businesses who would potentially be in the sights Microsoft's so called "patent" weapon. None of Microsoft's patent FUD has value if prevailing public opinion questions the value of Microsoft's so-called "patent" weapon.

sue sue sue sue sue sue

But then again, sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue
sue sue sue sue and more

sue sue sue suesue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue Crookes sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue wacko sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue 1310 people sue sue sue This thing is getting a little out of hand, dontcha think?.

And the really funny thing is, I'm a lawyer.

Corporate and institutional FOSS users can be helped out here by a change in the media environment. We can just call Microsoft's bluff. As of 17:53 pm on 2007-05-22, we have 514 people who have signed up to be "sued" by Microsoft for Microsoft's "patent claims". Wink, wink, nod, nod.

If we continue to get a large response to the "Sue me first, Microsoft" list, we have a greater chance of getting media exposure for the fact that Microsoft makes bluffs, and just backs off of those bluffs. We ignored SCO, and so we can ignore Microsoft, too. The place to sign up to challenge Microsoft to sue you is here:

http://digitaltippingpoint.com/wiki/index.php?titl e=Sue_me_first%2C_Microsoft

The story about our "Sue me first, Microsoft" challenge appeared here yesterday on Slashdot. A story appeared here today in Redmond Mag on-line. So we practically have Microsoft surrounded. Heh. Okay, maybe not. But we're getting there.

Christian Einfeldt,

Producer, The Digital Tipping Point

If there was much FUD to be had then people would not already be signing up to be sued first

Lets see the Microsoft tax for moving mountains using mostly Linux.

This Microsoft FUD campaign really needs to be challenged, IMHO. I am an attorney, and I don't think that Microsoft has valid patent claims against me personally, and I am using Edgy Ubuntu and Mepis 6.5 and SuSE 10.0 and SuSE 10.2. The Mepis 6.5 SuSE 10.2 I am using in my law practice; and the Edgy and SuSE 10.0 I am using to make a film about Microsoft's anticipated loss of market share due to the growing popularity of FOSS. The film is called the Digital Tipping Point, so you would think that if Microsoft has a desire to shut up anyone, I would be among them. At any rate, I have created a list of people who would like to be sued by Microsoft. Please feel free to sign up. The more the merrier! It's a wiki page. Here is the tinyURL:

http://tinyurl.com/2wlemy

Here is the full page:

http://digitaltippingpoint.com/wiki/index.php?titl e=Sue_me_first%2C_Microsoft

I am an attorney, and I don't think that Microsoft has valid patent claims against me personally, and I am using Edgy Ubuntu and Mepis 6.5 and SuSE 10.0 and SuSE 10.2. The Mepis 6.5 SuSE 10.2 I am using in my law practice; and the Edgy and SuSE 10.0 I am using to make a film about Microsoft's anticipated loss of market share due to the growing popularity of FOSS. The film is called the Digital Tipping Point, so you would think that if Microsoft has a desire to shut up anyone, I would be among them. At any rate, I have created a list of people who would like to be sued by Microsoft. Please feel free to sign up. The more the merrier! It's a wiki page. Here is the tinyURL:

http://tinyurl.com/2wlemy

Here is the full page:

http://digitaltippingpoint.com/wiki/index.php?titl e=Sue_me_first%2C_Microsoft