I find it amusing and utterly hypocritical that Microsoft is pulling the IP rights trick. They've literally written the book on such maneuvers. I don't think I have to enumerate them here as the audience is probably quite well versed on this. You can basically write the entire NT kernel and Explorer shell from examples garnered elsewhere - open source or not.
Good luck on trying to prove this case, btw. IP is literally a galaxies worth of spiderwebs interspersing billions and billions of lines of code from thousands of companies, educational institutions, Joe-six pack, and yes, even Homer Simpson.
Open source/format is such a misunderstood term.
By extension, it is believed that this means a completely democratic, transparent, and even collegiate collaborative development environment.
Increasingly, it means "using this term is one of the best ways we can bring down Microsuck"
Ultimately, this may mean more leverage for one or a group of interests--something that is never good for a dye-in-the-wool open source believer.
Not all that surprising:
Major corporation: billions in assets; able to sequester our 'best minds' from our most 'enlightened institutions': Harvard, Yale, Columbia. These lawyers encrypt the most convoluted, technically dense lawerly material they can to exploit every nuance and crevice the 'law' allows.
Versus this, the average man is woefully ill-equipped to fight for or protect himself.
And if she tries; millions of dollars worth of time and money are thrown in her direction. The companies can afford it; the average individual doesn't stand a chance.
I weep that our best minds are devoted to pursuits such as this.
Slashdot Mirror
Agreed. Again, back to the lawyers. Sheesh.
I find it amusing and utterly hypocritical that Microsoft is pulling the IP rights trick. They've literally written the book on such maneuvers. I don't think I have to enumerate them here as the audience is probably quite well versed on this. You can basically write the entire NT kernel and Explorer shell from examples garnered elsewhere - open source or not. Good luck on trying to prove this case, btw. IP is literally a galaxies worth of spiderwebs interspersing billions and billions of lines of code from thousands of companies, educational institutions, Joe-six pack, and yes, even Homer Simpson.
You are mistaking definition from reality. Phrenology is also clearly defined - this doesn't make it real.
Open source/format is such a misunderstood term. By extension, it is believed that this means a completely democratic, transparent, and even collegiate collaborative development environment. Increasingly, it means "using this term is one of the best ways we can bring down Microsuck" Ultimately, this may mean more leverage for one or a group of interests--something that is never good for a dye-in-the-wool open source believer.
Not all that surprising: Major corporation: billions in assets; able to sequester our 'best minds' from our most 'enlightened institutions': Harvard, Yale, Columbia. These lawyers encrypt the most convoluted, technically dense lawerly material they can to exploit every nuance and crevice the 'law' allows. Versus this, the average man is woefully ill-equipped to fight for or protect himself. And if she tries; millions of dollars worth of time and money are thrown in her direction. The companies can afford it; the average individual doesn't stand a chance. I weep that our best minds are devoted to pursuits such as this.