Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Is Sued For Patent Violation Over .NET
randomErr writes "As reported by Info World, Microsoft was issued a cease and desist order on February 7 of this year by Vertical Computer Systems. The order was for patent infringement by the current implementations of the .NET framework. Both the .NET framework and Vertical Computer Systems' SiteFlash use XML to create component-based structures that are used to build and operate web sites. Vertical Computer Systems is requesting a full jury trial. If VCS prevails, .NET technology implementations as we know them may completely change and Microsoft would probably have to pay out a hefty sum."
What a load of nonsense. They are obliged to use their best judgement - that doesn't mean they are obliged to take back empty cans for 1/4c each in case they are sued for not increasing shareholder value. Nor are they obliged to ensure the lights are switched off at night to save electricity costs or that envelopes are reused to save stationary costs. Of course anyone can sue anyone for anything, but that doesn't mean you are 'obliged' to do stupid things in case stupid people bring stupid lawsuits. If you wish to argue this point please post links showing the plethora of lawsuits against companies for not taking out patents on obvious or non-original ideas.
Not that I think software patents are good by any stretch.
But, I have found that .NET has resulted in some of the lousiest programmers ever. So, ditched another POS would be fantastic.
Linux - because it doesn't leave that Steve Ballmer aftertaste.
FTFPA: A method for generating a computer application on a host system in an arbitrary object framework that separates a content of said computer application, a form of said computer application and a functionality of said computer application, said method comprising: creating arbitrary objects with corresponding arbitrary names of various object types for generating said content of said computer application, said form of said computer application, and said functionality of said computer application; managing said arbitrary objects in an object library; and deploying said arbitrary objects from said object library into a design framework to create said computer application. (emphasis mine)
julesh: What they've patented is the use of "design mode" with a "toolbox" of object types, in the specific way that visual studio does it.
WTF?
This is all GIBBERISH!!!
PS: Whaddup wit duh word "a" in TFPA? Why didn't they use the word "any"? As a last resort, if I were M$FT's lawyers, I'd tell the court that as used by M$FT in
I mean seriously - ain't Grammar Fascism kinda the entire point of the generic law school curriculum & bar exam?
There's a correct and incorrect way to write, too. Is your use of "conscience" an example of said Ebonics? In English, we'd say "conscious". Either way, the parent's point is that on /., using either American or English dialects is perfectly acceptable, and doesn't have much to do with the existence of Ebonics. Fo shizzle.
On the contrary. What you advise is a WILLFUL act. You know you can infringe but INTENTIONALLY choose not to verify you do.
If you do your best to make sure you're not infringing, you will be acting in good faith.
Ask any decent lawyer what "in good faith" means, and what WILLFUL ignorance of a possibility of infringiment means, and what consequences they have.