Slashdot Mirror
Has Microsoft's Patent War Against Linux Begun?
Glyn Moody writes "Microsoft has filed a suit against TomTom, 'alleging that the in-car navigation company's devices violate eight of its patents — including three that relate to TomTom's implementation of the Linux kernel.' What's interesting is that the intellectual property lawyer behind the move, Horacio Gutierrez, has just been promoted to the rank of corporate vice president at Microsoft. Is this his way of announcing that he intends going on the attack against Linux?"
3 patents relate to car navigation systems and I can't really tell who's right...
But patent 5579517 is very simple for all to understand: it's the infamous way of Windows 95 to offer long file names (32 characters) over DOS, which only allowed 8-character names.
So Microsoft patented the way to store a cross-reference between the nice, readable filename, and the ugly, DOS name.
Does Linux do that? Sure, there might be a FAT driver somewhere... But I hope TomTom doesn't use FAT. If so, Microsoft is abusing the patent process.
And am I the only one to see irony in the fact that Microsoft patented a software defect?
People who live in glass houses not an issue here!
Now what has Linux ever done to you... Tux has fellings too.
Its not my fault, someone put a wall in my way.
Microsoft has patented a bunch of stuff related to FAT32 and has aggressively licensed FAT32. They would have pursued this regardless of the OS underneath the TomTom software.
is to get companies to start using a different FS on memory cards. In particular, it might be useful to pick one of the OSS FS and see it dominate the industry. All it would take is several large companies to decide to change NOW, and the rest would follow.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
Skip the ads and get the PDF of the complaint:
http://media.techflash.com/documents/tomtomComplaint.pdf
A quickie read of it still has me going "WTF!?" a lot. Seriously - they patented such things like:
"Vehicle Computer System with Wireless Connectivity"
"Portable Computing Device-Integrated Appliance"
A quick look at the dates these things were granted, and most gadget geeks' memories should spark something: Most of this crap shouldn't have been patentable in the first place (wish they appended the patents to the complaint, though... it'd make things a lot easier to eyeball and evaluate in one spot).
I'm guessing MSFT is just hoping to force a settlement, so that they can then use it as a cudgel... thing is, Microsoft is using a lot of OSS code nowadays too (IIRC in MSN/Live Messenger, Visual Studio 2008, and etc - linky here).
It actually means he has too many friends, but has been isolated from anywhere where he might continue to do damage.
"There are some people that if they don't know, you can't tell them." ~ Louis Armstrong
But its growth can be stunned. The lawsuits are not designed to stop Linux; a defendant with sufficiently deep pocket can fend off the attack, EVENTUALLY. The real intend of these suits are to stun the growth of Linux through FUD.
ELOI, ELOI, LAMA SABACHTHANI!?
Netbooks are a serious threat to them, and they know it. To follow the netbooks will be larger machines with limited processing for the avg joes out there.
On a personal note, I find it very delightful that a company that Embraced, Enhanced, Extinguished, might be brought down by a tiny, cheap machine called EEE.
I know that it's always silly to try to predict the future, but here I go none the less. For the most part, all of the core computing applications have already been developed. Unless business processes change significantly, there are only so many systems that a company will ever need to deploy. There will be word processing applications, spreadsheets, databases, webpages, file servers, print servers and a slew of other devices. However the core of the network and the computing environment will remain rather static. Over the last decade, Microsoft developed a lot of core business applications in the form of Windows, Windows Server, Office and Exchange. As the room for innovation in the IT world shrinks, Microsoft will have to fall back to the patent portfolio. If their lawyers were smart, they patented every single technology that they could with the foreknowledge that sooner or later, someone else would want to develop software to do the same thing.
I think we are going to see Microsoft leveraging their patents more and more aggressively as time goes on. They have poured untold billions of dollars in R&D. It seems to me like they need to pursue patent litigation to generate some sort of ROI on all those R&D dollars.
TomTom were found to be a gpl violator in '04, sued Garmin in '07 and Toyota in '08 for infringing TomTom patents, and have a very restrictive EULA.
A sig?!? I don't think so.....
A patent is supposed to protect a commercial product from being copied by the market. This is to promote people to share their ideas and collaborate while protecting the inventor. Patenting software concepts is counter intuitive to this process where no ingenuity of solving a problem is demonstrated. A lot of the patents that make it though now a days are really abusive of the protection and way to generalized to the technology they use.
Microsoft has been totally consistent in their rants on this topic. They are all for "Open Source" so long as they get a per copy patent royalty when it gets deployed in a shipping product. Because nobody can do anything without infringing their all encompassing patent portfolio. And they are probably right. And Linux is infringing patents held by every other tech company. Normally they just cross license between each other and little money actually changes hands, it is just a gate keeping new competitors without patents of their own to cross license at a disadvantage. Which is exactly where Linux is.
The patent system needs to be fixed. But every large company has billions invested in the current broken system AND, as noted above, depends on patents to keep new unexpected competitors from springing up.
Democrat delenda est
As the room for innovation in the IT world shrinks, Microsoft will have to fall back to the patent portfolio
You think the room for innovation in the IT world shrinks. It doesn't shrink. If anything, there's more room for innovation than ever as more people recognize the value of software. It's just that, its a lot harder to understand where to innovate than it was before, but the rewards are there.
Microsoft's problem isn't so much that there's no more room to innovate then, its that, its not as sure as where to go as it was in the past. Linux shows that you can't just rest on the complexity of a product and hope people can't figure out how to make it. Even if every single Microsoft patent holds, that basically means the core of their business expires within a decade, and a lot of it has expired already.
Even though patents exist, even though they exist for what some may say too long, they are only a delay against the inevitable. If Microsoft does not leverage their know-how into new products and new services, successfully, reinventing its own core technologies and assumptions, then it will die.
This is my sig.
This'll probably mean TomTom will (have to) retract from the US market and leave some 300 million people to find their ways using dead tree maps.
I use a TomTom myself and find it a great little Linux device but I'm less than impressed with the way they treat the Linux community, for example you can only update via a Windows application that doesn't even run in wine.
"The likes of Facebook and WhatsApp are free to those whose privacy is of zero value."
Why is the third link in the summary to a blog about the first link? Ok so the first link is the story itself then the third one which only has three statements of thought:
It's been in the air for ages, and now it's happening:
/*He copies in some summary sentences from the article. */
Presumably those are the three that relate to Linux, in which case this is likely to have broader implications than just the in-car navigation market.
Here's a nice statement of how Microsoft views all this:
/* He then posts a small quote from the first article. */
In other words, Microsoft "respects and appreciates" open source until it actually starts to replace Microsoft's offerings, in which case the charming smile is replaced with the shark's grimace.
It may not be a coincidence that Gutierrez has just been promoted to the rank of corporate vice president: could this legal action be his way of announcing the direction he and Microsoft will now take in the battle against Linux?
Is someone trying to get page hits here? What's the "direct hits to my blog" form of Slashvertisement?
Looking at the pdf, it looks like Google Maps, Yahoo Maps, Mapquest, et al. are infringing on Microsoft's patent too.
When does Ford sue GM for making vehicles?
> Has Microsoft's Patent War Against Linux Begun?
That's patently not true!
Short filenames doesn't seem like a "Linux" issue to me since Linux doesn't do this. If Linux does have a driver that does this, then there may be some validity toward their claims. Perhaps that driver should be removed from Linux.
Linux's FAT32 driver does this. Removing the FAT32 driver would cause a lot of interoperability problems that would make Linux unsuitable for huge volumes of applications, e.g. accessing pictures stored on digital cameras (off the top of my head). TomTom needs this driver because they store the system on an SD card with the aim that systems can be upgraded/fixed by directly accessing the filesystem from a Windows PC, so they have to use either FAT32 or NTFS, and as Linux's support of NTFS is essentially a joke FAT32 is the only real option, therefore distributing a version without the offending driver compiled in is not an option for them.
If every OS except Windows is able to
then Windows isn't the right OS for Grandma.
I know Windows still has major market penetration in many segments of society, but Grandmas just aren't where it should be. Get 'er a Mac. Or if you'll install it for her, get her Linux.
"Believe me!" -- Donald Trump
Just wait for the truckload of legal papers from IBM, Google, etc tomorrow morning in MS's curb.
how long until
But Microsoft promised they wouldn't use their growing portfolio of patents this way.. They wouldn't lie to me would they?
And if you believed them, or are surprised, you are a fool. ( tho i wasn't expecting them to start for another year or two )
---- Booth was a patriot ----
While we may hate them for it, they were legally awarded the patent and they offer licenses to use it.. I don't see that as abuse as that is how the patent process should work.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
I find it very delightful that a company that Embraced, Enhanced, Extinguished, might be brought down by a tiny, cheap machine called EEE.
Asus's EEE has been running Windows for a while.
Falcon
Should there be a Law?
I dislike having to borrow a Windows box every time I want to update my TomTom.
TomTom needs this driver because they store the system on an SD card with the aim that systems can be upgraded/fixed by directly accessing the filesystem from a Windows PC, so they have to use either FAT32 or NTFS, and as Linux's support of NTFS is essentially a joke
Linux's NTFS support is a joke? When did it stop working? I've been using it without problems for a couple of years now.
I'm waiting for a "-1 somepeoplejustshouldn'tgetmodprivileges" meta-moderation.
Should've been "SteveSteve GO"
The current situation is like John Wayne saying 'I'm not gunna hit ya ...' with the threat of a confrontation looming over anyone who would dare challenge M$ dominance. For M$ it will signal their long coming slide into irrelevance if they do and their impotence if they don't.
My ism, it's full of beliefs.
TomTom's shares are on an historical low. This might be one of M$ ways to kill them off for good and get into the mapping business for real. I presume that they are not so happy with Google being in it. Only a wild guess, but it might be that they are on their normal evil path again. Not against Linux, but against a weak company that might be suitable for a take over.
Here's a Dutch link, but the picture and amounts tell a clear story:
http://www.telegraaf.nl/dft/bedrijven/tomtom/?tabid=bedrijven&tab=7
Just for the sake of discussion, where do you see the evolution going?
Though I wouldn't want any for now, Bionics, Cybernetics or implants.
Falcon
Should there be a Law?
Am I missing something? Why is it safe to use MS NTFS but not FAT32??
From the shorter PDF:
http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/6175789.html — Vehicle computer system with open platform architecture
http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/7054745.html — Method and system for generating driving directions
http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/6704032.html — Methods and arrangements for interacting with controllable objects within a graphical user interface environment using various input mechanisms
http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/7117286.html — Portable computing device-integrated appliance
http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/6202008.html — Vehicle computer system with wireless internet connectivity
http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/5579517.html — Common name space for long and short filenames
http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/5758352.html — Common name space for long and short filenames
http://www.google.com/patents?id=02YIAAAAEBAJ&dq=6,256,642 — Method and system for file system management using a flash-erasable, programmable, read-only memory.
Some other text seems necessary in order to type stuff and get links in.
Ask me about repetitive DNA
to abuse their monopoly. As convicted monopolists, they should be forced to forfeit the patent. This is a perfect place to apply what I said before in the EU thread.
What?
Just when PJ thought she'd need to find something "interesting" for Groklaw to do.
Yeah, but I'd watch for the Democrat-majority congress and along with the new Democrat administration to Bono-ize patent terms just as was done for copyright terms. If they'll do it for Disney, why not for the US' largest OS vendor Microsoft?
Because many other large corporations will also be adversely affected by extending patent terms. Also it's not just Democrats who extended copyrights, the Copyright Term Extension Act of 1998 was also called the Sonny Bono Copyright Term Extension Act after the artist/performer Sonny Bono who was a Republican. Also though a Democratic President, Bill Clinton, signed it the Republicans controlled congress. 55 Senators and 228 members of the House, a majority in both cases, were Republicans.
Falcon
Should there be a Law?
The patents that are not car-GPS-specific have to deal with: short filenames
Actually, from a quick read, those two patents appear to deal with stuffing long filenames into a file system originally designed only to support short filenames, in a backwards-compatible fashion. Linux's FAT implementation does do that, so that it can read and write FAT file systems with long names.
The final issue is GUI objects. How MS got a patent on this one befuddles me. Obviously, Xerox/Parc beat them to this one. Why doesn't anyone overturn this patent?
Because it's not something so simple as a patent on "GUI objects"?
Why is it safe to use MS NTFS but not FAT32??
If by "safe" you mean "safe from the Microsoft patents in question", it's because NTFS was designed to support long file names, so there was no need to use a hack of the sort described by the two long filename patents to add support for long filenames in a backwards-compatible fashion. Perhaps other Microsoft patents cover NTFS, but the ones cited in the article don't.
Then issues like this can go away (I hope).
If you hope that Haiku's or ReactOS's FAT implementation will somehow magically not infringe the two "long filename" patents when Linux's do, you hope in vain - the patent covers how stuff is written to storage, and if you do that differently form how (V)FAT does it, you might have an interesting file system, but you wouldn't have one that can handle stuff written so that Microsoft's FAT implementation(s) can read it.
With the possible exception of the flash file system patent, the other patent issues also wouldn't be alleviated by using a different OS.
So why would Haiku or ReactOS make issues such as this go away?
As soon as yesterday, TomTom will complain to EC of MS anti-competitive tactics, specially with regard to the so called "interoperationality".
As for the file system, TomTom has nothing to do with it as the cards are pre-formated by the manufactors. If anyone may be infringing, are those manufactors.
The rest of the patents are just very common useless patents of joining two things in an obvious way and claim it to be an "invention". Very thin patents indeed.
Alas...
Linux's support of NTFS is essentially a joke
Linux has full read/write support for NTFS volumes.
http://www.ntfs-3g.org/
What exactly is funny about this?
I have been wondering what filesystem I should use for a flash card. Especially if I need compatibility. FAT doesn't quite fit the bill, especially if MS starts suing people over it. UDF seems to be the answer. (Wikipedia page)
It already has native drivers in most, if not all operating systems, MS windows (apparently XP doesn't have write support), Macs, Linux and even FreeBSD (as I understand). Frome what I understand, it is intended to reduce the number of writes (intended for rewritable CDs/DVDs), so it should give the longest life to the card. It supports many Posix / Unix filesystem features (hard/sym linking, sparse files, long filenames without ugly hacks, etc...)
However, I have troubles figuring out how to make Linux autodetect UDF, so I am not sure in my experiments I am creating the FS correctly.
What other choices are out there? For linux specific, ext2 seems to be the choice for native stuff, plus cramfs (sp?) for read-only. (I'm thinking of making a bootable flash card for my Asus EEE). I will probably have to use FAT for my digital camera as this is the only format it supports, but it appears to be the old-fashoned DOS shortname (not vfat or 32), so I guess these patents are not a problem?
This is what my research tells me, but it is not much.
#1 ReactOS and HaikuOS can use a different file system than FAT.
#2 The source code of the ReactOS and HaikuOS uses different techniques to access FAT volumes anyway.
#3 Since ReactOS and HaikuOS are not as widely used as Linux, doubtful Microsoft will sue them as there is no money to be made doing so. TomTom on the other hand, earns money hand over fist and thus made themselves a target by Microsoft.
Please note this is not "suing Linux" but "Suing Tomtom" for using a Linux based solution that accesses FAT devices and stores an 8 lettered file name as a 32 filed one. Had Tomtom used Windows CE, doubtful Microsoft would have sued them.
Yes it is possible to access FAT volumes and not break any patents, and still leave them in a way that Microsoft's FAT implementation(s) can still read it. For example you can read it in the 8 character file name, as Apple's old operating systems used to do and ignore the 32 character file name.
Remember, Slashdot does not have a -1 disagree moderation, and no, troll, flamebait, and overrated are not substitutes.
And now it's sprung.
Now anybody can read this and then ask themselves, "What's the purpose for Moonlight?" Could the reason Microsoft paid all that money to Novell be to get them to hire some impressionable engineer to import Microsoft IP into Linux? Say it ain't so.
Help stamp out iliturcy.
Hmmm... it seems part of my problem was not having the correct tools for UDF ( I think I was trying to use mkisofs with the udf option ). The proper tools for Linux appear to be on Sourceforge.
Thank you Sourceforge, Inc. for both slashdot and your open source site. :-) I should really be thinking about renewing my subscription to slashdot. I'm sure it helps pay for both sites...
Actually, from a quick read, those two patents appear to deal with stuffing long filenames into a file system originally designed only to support short filenames, in a backwards-compatible fashion. Linux's FAT implementation does do that, so that it can read and write FAT file systems with long names.
True. The problem for Microsoft though is that their fat32 method of "stuffing long filenames into a file system originally designed only to support short filenames" is obvious, and not innovative. At the time, there were many options available, and suggested to Microsoft, on how to do this, and Microsoft just chose one, and then patented it.
If put to the test in court, this patent won't pass the "obviousness" criteria. Also, since this is an interoperability function, it probably isn't patentable for that reason either. The order of arrangement of characters within a directory block on disk is purely a mathematical function, and in light of the Bilski decision, it is probably not valid for that reason also.
Finally ... there is voluminous prior art on the methods to structure information in filesystems. The IBM Technical Disclosure Bulletin would surely have something to contribute to this topic.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_Technical_Disclosure_Bulletin
TomTom have a lot of possible defenses here. I wouldn't be surprised if the OIN and/or the Patent Commons chipped in some patents to help with a countersuit, if asked to do so.
Could UMSDOS (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Umsdos) be seen as prior art for at long file name patent (http://www.google.com/patents?vid=USPAT5579517)?
it is only after a long journey that you know the strength of the horse.
#1 ReactOS and HaikuOS can use a different file system than FAT.
So could the Linux that TomTom are using.
#2 The source code of the ReactOS and HaikuOS uses different techniques to access FAT volumes anyway.
Unless I'm missing something, the patent is about the on-disk format, not just the techniques to access the data stored in that format.
#3 Since ReactOS and HaikuOS are not as widely used as Linux, doubtful Microsoft will sue them as there is no money to be made doing so. TomTom on the other hand, earns money hand over fist and thus made themselves a target by Microsoft.
Please note this is not "suing Linux" but "Suing Tomtom" for using a Linux based solution that accesses FAT devices and stores an 8 lettered file name as a 32 filed one. Had Tomtom used Windows CE, doubtful Microsoft would have sued them.
As you note, this is "suing TomTom"; your argument appears to be that if TomTom were to use HaikuOS or ReactOS, they still would have been sued, in which case neither HaikuOS nor ReactOS would make issues like this go away.
Yes it is possible to access FAT volumes and not break any patents, and still leave them in a way that Microsoft's FAT implementation(s) can still read it. For example you can read it in the 8 character file name, as Apple's old operating systems used to do and ignore the 32 character file name.
Do the filesystems that TomTom are reading have files with long names on them? If so, then they risk infringing the patent. If not, then they could presumably just rip the VFAT stuff out of the file system code (or have somebody else do it) and get rid of their concerns for that patent.
Of course, that still leaves the patents unrelated to FAT....
well, i know that NTFS was completely reverse engineered without seeing any of the original source, and does not actually use any code from microsoft, not sure if that was done for FAT32
In the imagination of paranoid Linux geeks? Yes. To anybody at Microsoft? No.
Comment of the year
DRIVER DOWNLOAD. How often do the MS ppl install unknown apps, let alone drivers? ALL THE TIME. And you think that adding a driver will cause an issue?
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
You might say this is an attack on one small company, not on Linux. Here's the thing. Microsoft doesn't have to go after every user of Linux. All they have to do is set a precendent that any embedded device manufacturer could be selectively sued by Microsoft at any time if they base their device on Linux, and Linux will immediately be under an embargo for use in embedded devices (at least, devices for sale in jurisdictions that recognize the validity of the patents which the lawsuit is based on). At that point, those companies will likely stop making or selling any more devices based on Linux, and begin using Windows CE, WindRiver, Symbian, Palm, etc.
Now, I want to add here that, just because some journalist says the alleged patent infringment is because of the use of Linux, doesn't necessarily mean that is the case, but if it is the case, and if those patents are held to be valid, then that single lawsuit against TomTom could destroy the Linux device marketplace.
Meet the refrigerator
Thank you, thank you, I'll be hear all week....
I don't therefore I'm not.
I was thinking about building a trebuchet and launching shit at his house... Underground or not, his freaking Yacht will be messy.
Is there anything better than clicking through Microsoft ads on Slashdot?
It's possible, of course, that Microsoft does hold patents that cover portions of NTFS, which haven't yet been identified as doing so. But the NTFS-3g people at least claim that "no NTFS patent is known in any country".
10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10
The reign of the dark side is coming.
Theses are the 8 patents that are being disputed.
Support the 30 Hour Work Week!!!
Read this story a couple of times and think about trusting the very same company for your future.
I suspect MS has tried to push WinCE on Tomtom to replace Linux, and threatened them to sue them if they refused. These days, we see windows coming on devices where we would not expect it, and it is possible that there is some back pressure from MS.
You are right, of course. I hadn't realized the tactic at first, but you are dead on the money. I strongly suspect that their real target isn't TomTom; it's Asus, or one of the other Linux-shipping vendors.
It would be a great service to the world's technology companies if a company like IBM or Apple, or a coalition of companies, came together and proposed an open alternative to FAT. I doubt it'd happen, but something does need to be done: it's just as important as doing something like standardizing on a cell phone charger adapter.
In the face of it, this is ridiculous. It is, no pun intended, patently absurd. Every device I can think of that has been made in the past 15, 20 years that can read or write to CF cards or use USB has had FAT support: cameras, laptops, etc. Every OS supports it, and has for at least 15 years.
Isn't there some sort of statute of limitations on how long you can wait to try and enforce a patent? Never mind the fact that this, like most other patents, really shouldn't be valid due to their "no shit" nature.
~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
Microsoft to government: "You made the economy SUCK dude"
Government to MS: "So go make some money, that's like your JOB"
MS back: "OK but the economy SUCKS so bad that we're going to start low-intensity patent wars all over the place so we can start raking in dough and building precedents so we can make MORE money later, so don't sue us, k"
Government: "FINE just stop complaining about us and make your stockholders some MONEY morons. And give us a lot of money while you're at it"
udftools is included in most distros. You don't even need to download from SF directly.
Colorless green Cthulhu waits dreaming furiously.
When you run out of innovation you hire lawyers to enforce your remaining patents. It worked so well for SCO, Microsoft doesn't want to be left out.
3) Hold my entire music collection.
:-O
Where did you find the 120GB version?
Linux's NTFS support is a joke? When did it stop working? I've been using it without problems for a couple of years now.
I've tried three different systems for supporting NTFS. One of them, the original, all the documentation has large warnings that enabling write access can corrupt your filesystem. This is clearly not a viable choice. Another requires a copy of ntfs.sys from a windows install. This is clearly not viable for an embedded system supplier. The third had appallingly slow performance, with most file operations taking 2-3 times as long as they did for other filesystems, including FAT32 which is known for its slow performance. It works, so I've ended up using it, but I'm far from happy with it, and would recommend to anyone who needs to share files between Linux and Windows systems that having a FAT system is still the best way of doing it.
I'll grant I'm using Debian Etch, so I'm probably a little behind the curve in terms of what's available in cutting-edge Linux, but given that we're talking about systems that were released to market in 2005 (and probably therefore designed in 2004 or even 2003), cutting edge isn't exactly an option for TomTom either.
Big fucking explosions.
It's been a good while since we had any used to set some assholes back on the straight and narrow. I think it's time we started up again and had a good ol' time doing so.
Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
One thing to add into this debate: Microsoft can have a big imposing patent portfolio and can patent something like the filename table mentioned above, but its patents *can* be bypassed by similar inventions. The original point of the patent system (as I understand it) was both to allow inventors to earn money from their inventions by giving them an exclusive right to them AND to give others an incentive to develop *new* mechanisms to work around patented ideas.
Basically, if your competitor had patented something and was successful, the only way you can make money is if you figure out how to develop around your competitor's patent (thus, supposedly spurring innovation). This is also, I guess, why software patents are significantly more difficult to administer than hardware patents.
It makes many patent cases (and patent portfolios) seem less intimidating when you look at them in this way.
can fuck off. Nuff said. They as well as much/most/all of the patent system for everything else, everywhere in the world, need to be banished like a plague. They only slow the progress of development and science.
Promote true freedom - support standards and interoperability.
According to Pubpat, the '517 patent was rejected in 2004. IANAL so I have no idea what that means for the lawsuit.
Someone who doesn't know that you start sentences with capital letters shouldn't be telling others to go and learn to read - not to mention the missing comma between "read" and "fanbois".
Gentoo Linux - another day, another USE flag.
Remember back when GIF was the number one image type on the internet? And then there was a licensing issue?
Almost killed the use of GIF as a filetype. Gave rise to the predominance of JPG and the growth of the PNG format.
I can't remember the last time I saw a gif that wasn't animated (Which seems to the be preferred small moving animatic format. For now.)
well, i know that NTFS was completely reverse engineered without seeing any of the original source, and does not actually use any code from microsoft
Sadly, that protects against plagiarism and copyright violations. It does not protect against patent violations.
And MS make minimal profit from each EEE/XP. They make almost nothing on XP itself, and most people who buy an EEE won't install Office on it (too difficult to do, as EEEs have no CDROM drive).
If the netbook takes over a huge chunk of the computing market, watch Microsoft starve.
Is what you really meant.
hmmmm... meh. I'd post a link but I'm feeling lethargic.
Semi-automatic amateur armchair Australian philosopher; conjecture ready at any moment...
ntfs-3g is the driver to use. I don't remember if they still have the big scary warnings but in the usual Linux trend it was probably to say "do no use this in a mission-critical setting!!!" in the early days, I've used it with write support for years and never experienced any data corruption. I did earlier experience a bug in that writing files past the 2GB (or was it 4GB?) limit on external disks would fail with error, but that's gone too. My read/write speeds are completely on par with Linux file systems though the CPU usage is a bit higher.
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
8 billion dollars a year in R&D Expenses and THIS is the return on that 'investment'? Patent litigation for floppy disk filesystems?
Technology -- No Place For Wimps! Grateful Dead and Jerry Garcia Chatroom -- http://www.wemissjerry.org
Not if the judge says different.
Remember how Rambus just got away with patent trolling because an appeals court blessed them?
It doesn't matter what the law says, if a judge rules against you, you're screwed. And since stare decisis constrains future decisions (aka "settle it now and we don't care if a mistake gets set in stone"), once screwed always screwed.
Anyone who has a stake in the outcome of this case needs to get their say in now or forever hold his peace.
I shed a tear for all those who support any patent system and believe in such a system.
This sort of behavior should really help the world out in these times of recession/depression
Im so pleased i stoped using microsoft products about 8 years ago as microsoft behaves like a child sociopath most to all of the time like a troubled brother you never wanted as he has caused nothing but shame to the family.
Profile of a Sociopath
* Glibness and Superficial Charm
* Manipulative and Conning
* Grandiose Sense of Self Feels entitled to certain things as "their right."
* Pathological Lying Has no problem lying coolly and easily and it is almost impossible for them to be truthful on a consistent basis.
* Lack of Remorse, Shame or Guilt A deep seated rage, which is split off and repressed, is at their core. Does not see others around them as people, but only as targets and opportunities.
* Shallow Emotions When they show what seems to be warmth, joy, love and compassion it is more feigned than experienced and serves an ulterior motive.
* Incapacity for Love
* Need for Stimulation Living on the edge. Verbal outbursts and physical punishments are normal. Promiscuity and gambling are common.
* Callousness/Lack of Empathy Unable to empathize with the pain of their victims, having only contempt for others
* Poor Behavioral Controls/Impulsive Nature Believe they are all-powerful, all-knowing, entitled to every wish, no sense of personal boundaries, no concern for their impact on others.
* Early Behavior Problems/Juvenile Delinquency Usually has a history of behavioral and academic difficulties, yet "gets by" by conning others. Problems in making and keeping friends.
* Irresponsibility/Unreliability Not concerned about wrecking others' lives and dreams. Oblivious or indifferent to the devastation they cause. Does not accept blame themselves, but blames others, even for acts they obviously committed.
* Promiscuous Behavior/Infidelity Promiscuity, acting out of all sorts.
* Lack of Realistic Life Plan/Parasitic Lifestyle Tends to move around a lot or makes all encompassing promises for the future, poor work ethic but exploits others effectively.
* Criminal or Entrepreneurial Versatility Changes their image as needed to avoid prosecution.
= Profit ?
A vehicle computer system has a housing sized to be mounted in a vehicle dashboard or other appropriate location. A computer is mounted within the housing and executes an open platform, multi-tasking operating system.
The computer runs multiple applications on the operating system, including both vehicle-related applications (e.g., vehicle security application, vehicle diagnostics application, communications application, etc.) and non-vehicle-related applications (e.g., entertainment application, word processing, etc.). The applications may be supplied by the vehicle manufacturer and/or by the vehicle user.
Methods and arrangements for interacting with controllable objects within a graphical user interface environment using various input mechanisms
.. The behavior models consider the notion that the user interface will most likely include various focusing (e.g., function selection) and/or editing (e.g., parameter modifying) capabilities. As such, the methods and arrangements can support several different behavior models, including, for example, a full-focus mode, a focus-free mode, and an edit-free mode'.
'Improved methods and arrangements provide user interface platforms
There was an interesting point in these posts. Linux's FS ARE under GPL. 4 ways around that.
My own suggestion is that the Linux world should consider LGPLing the ext2 FS (yes, have to get ALL the authors to agree, but that is limited).
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
Reading of all UDF revisions (1.02 - 2.60) on both block device (e.g., hard drives and USB drives) and most optical media is supported. Writing to block devices, DVD-RW and DVD+RW is supported with the following exceptions: (1) Cannot write Finder Info, Resource Fork, or other extended attributes in UDF volumes of revision 1.02 and 1.50; (2) Cannot write to mirrored metadata partition.
Most platforms that Wikipedia claims have write support have other limitations.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
Falcon, you are right. Republicans do support strong IP legislation for the benefit of Hollywood and I've never understood why.
When it comes down to the brass tacks, both political parties basically fight for federal dollars and rights for their constituencies. In the case of Republicans, they really don't have any constituencies in the media business. They have Clint, Arnold and the late Charleton, but all of those guys are more libertarian Republicans than the core conservative Republicans. Charleton supported black civil rights big time in his day, Clint has put out a number of thoughtful movies that celebrate freedom and challenge stereotypes and Arnold's always been about America as an economic proposition. Incidentally, those are the kind of Republicans I like.
But that's really about it. The bulk of today's Hollywood is never going to approve of Orin Hatch, who was at the time the real leader of the Republican IP movement. If you are going to be a conservative in an environment where the media business is out to get you, and you generally demonize media all the time, then why support legislation that you perceive will help it? Democrats have no problem going after Republican bedrocks of oil, mining and agriculture. Why should Republicans stick up for Michael Moore and Barbara Streisand? Did they really think that Babs would suddenly say, "oh, I like Republicans now that I can get Yentil royalties for 70 years after I'm dead?" None of these artists have the right to their works anyway for that long.
If Republicans REALLY wanted to attract Hollywood's support, what they need to do is put legislation on the table that gives the actual Actors, Actresses, Writers and Directors, all a share of the cut of the sales of internet downloads, DVDs, iTunes, and more. They could have supported the strike, for one thing. All the owners getting striked against are all Democrats - like Speilberg, Geffen, Katzenberg and more... taking some money out of their pockets to give to the actual people that make the films would have split Hollywood politically.
But alas, it's not just that the Republicans of the last 15 years have been unable to keep to their own promise of limited government, they haven't even been good politicians! IT's one thing to look at a policy and say a candidate or a party is stupid. But when that party isn't even capable of seeing and then doing what it needs to do to attract support, then, my friend, is really when you have to say that they are all idiots.
I mean, I know you hate Bush, but as a politician, there are so many things he could have done at any given time to improve his own situation. Bush always had it in his head that if he did his policies successfully, then his personal popularity didn't matter. But what he didn't get, is that, in a democracy, you have to be popular to succeed.
This is my sig.
Last I checked that wasn't the requirement--the LGPLv3 requirement was that the downstream user (no such thing as an "end user") had to be as able to replace the implementation as easily as the author/upstream user can. That means things like signing keys, etc.
If it's in ROM and no one can replace it, that's fine (the license doesn't say you can't put binaries on write-once media. Seriously. Start grepping for it.)
You still have to distribute source and follow the rest of the rules.
Perhaps IBM could be persuaded to step into the fray. In a patent pissing match they could probably shut M$ down until M$ agreed to play nice.
The company does NOT have to distribute source as long as they use the reference code. A simple link on their site takes care of that. And if the company makes changes to the code, they would be smart to simply upload it to the site that has the reference code.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
The patents in question are idiotic.
In two patents, Microsoft basically tries to claim rights to running a general purpose OS on a computer designed for a car and having Internet access on such a machine. This is trying to patent a market niche.
In two other patents, they are trying to claim rights to the awful long/short filenames compatibility hack in FAT file systems. One patent is trying to claim allocating space from flash erasable memory in blocks. And the last patent is related to modes in user interfaces. All of these are trying to patent what any competent software developer would come up with when faced with such a programming task.
I hope Microsoft will be shredded to pieces in court.
Well, it looks like I was sleeping for the last decade... I can't remember PNG displacing GIF.
Rethinking email
Did you really think that Microsoft tying with Novell was a good idea?
This is just the beginning. We've seen what Microsoft is prepared to do... everything and anything to make the most money, ever.
Why trust them? They always say one thing and often do another. You aren't their friend, you are their source of money.
So what? Do you know how many vice presidents Microsoft employs? If it's anything like a bank, the title is rather meaningless.
I don't think this is about FAT at all. MS has been mapping the Earth in great detail for the past how many years now? I think they want to enter the navigation business and a good way to start is to take out their biggest competitor even before they enter the market. But I'm not sure what the status of software patents in Europe is (TomTom is a Dutch company), so maybe the only thing they can achieve is the elimination of TomTom from the American market. Anyway, I am surprised that the free software community hasn't come up with a good alternative for FAT because this whole issue was in the pipeline for years.
-- Cheers!
Aside from the FAT issues, these are even more troubling:
6175789 - Vehicle computer system with open platform architecture
6202008 - Vehicle computer system with wireless internet connectivity
There are a lot of people in the geek community who build Linux-based car computers: http://www.mp3car.com/ . These patents, at first reading, seem to lock up that entire product space. Or at least, that's how Microsoft is going to spin it...
Microsoft has been found guilty in the courts of breaking numerous anti-monopoly laws. They simply pay the fines and continue the same bad behavior. We should put teeth into the laws by stripping the right to hold patents from the offending companies. The resulting patents should be made public domain. This would end Microsoft's bad behavior and even better would probably end Microsoft as we know it.
This isn't about Linux, this about MSFT purchase of TellMe and the deal they have going with Ford do to the same functionality that TomTom does. This is about eliminating the competition for in this market space, business as usual.
I'll grant I'm using Debian Etch, so I'm probably a little behind the curve in terms of what's available in cutting-edge Linux,
That could be a very good reason.
By the way, for the record, I'm using Slackware with the default kernel, and have been for a couple of years now. That's just in case anyone wants to accuse me of using some bleeding edge distro or kernel.
I'm waiting for a "-1 somepeoplejustshouldn'tgetmodprivileges" meta-moderation.
Yes, this should be the way it falls out, but as has been mentioned, law lags WELL behind technology. FAT was allowed to be used with no consequence, a consequence of expecting people to use the platform you provided. MS didn't license the use of fat to every software developer that ever had to write a save function. If it did, the software industry today might be stuck somewhere in the early 90s, and MS would have killed itself by scaring away the good developers from wanting to write anything, and the corps away from overly complex domain intersections of legal and software before the business world was ready to consider such things.
Now that EULAs are a mainstay in business practice (and some trying to write them to override right of first sale), MS can easily pursue this line of legal action because it was 'always' their prerogative to do so. MS doesn't do things because they are right, they do them because the legal landscape permits them to. Now that they have monopolistic leverage and billions stored up in cash and assets, getting rulings against these actions is going to be difficult to say the least.
My suggestion would be to leverage the free software market to leverage the online community to sign or write for action requests and send them all to the appropriate geomapped governor/senator emails AS they roll into the servers. Microsoft wants to play hardball with lobbyists? Why not turn the entire 'net into a giant lobbyist machine with auto-forwards to elected emails? MS's consumer base is easily larger than any lobbyist base it could buy. Why can't we show officials, in this manner or something similar, that the paths MS has been pursuing and the lobbyists it hires are NOT in the democratic interests?
I know suspend/resume on Windows isn't the best supported feature, but can it be stopped???!!!
Look at me on a freshly installed Windows 7:
Start->(1500 menu clicks)->shutdown
See, it can be stopped perfectly.
Oh, wait...
WTF?
??
Still here?
[ An exception 0E has occurred at 000E:C29325654 ]
Press CTRL+ALT+DEL to restart your comput
Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent
Heroes die once, cowards live longer.