1. A patent search is not feasable even for large corporations. Even if you were able to identify some of that patents that MIGHT apply, you would not have the expertise to determine if they actually do apply. Even if you determined correctly that a particular patent does not apply, that does not mean that the patent holder would agree with you.
2. As someone else said, ignorance is bliss.
3. In your specific case it probably makes no difference. Unless the value of the product you are building exceeds the cost of enforcing the patent in the legal system the most you are likely to receive is a demand letter.
It is really sad that innovators can not build products without the fear of being crushed totally and everything the own being taken from tham by (what amounts to) a heartless system. We forget that many of the engineers the scientests that built our country in the 1800's came to the US to flee the European patent system that was crushing them. Think about that.
1. You never agreed to the EULA. Whether or not the EULA is even legal (or enforceable) is another matter.
2. You signed no form of pruchase (license)agreement with the seller (or I am assuming that you did not).
3. When you obtain a product from a seller that you have paid for, the expectation of ownership is very real.
4. Under copyright law the right for first sale should apply here regardless of what is written in the EULA which you never agreed to.
Simple solution.
Make a copy of the microsoft sticker on you machine. Remove the sticker to the best of you ability. Type a letter that states the purchase conditions and sign the letter. Sell the three items for whatever you can get for them thus reducing the cost of your machine.
You clearly never agreed to or signed the EULA, copyright law clearly restricts the copyholders rights here to the right-of-first-sale.
If the facts do not support you, pound the LAW.
If the LAW does not support you, pound the Facts.
If neither supports you, pound the table.
If you pound the table hard enough, they put your opponent out of business.
Your wish list isn't even warm. You will have to settle for a subset. The last real attempt at a virtual machine was P-Code, and where many P machines were available, the system never caught on. The problem was speed. Microsoft's.net and Java make some attempt at cross platform operability, but there are restrictions and a huge performance degradation.
For any major application, even compilers like C++ will require custome libraries that are not available on all target platforms.
The only Computer Language that I know of which has true cross platform support is ADA. ADA is one of the most powerful programming languages available but try finding a programer the likes to program in ADA. Just the mention of ADA makes my stomach turn.
Sorry, you are not going to find what you are looking for.
TOM
Voting with you feet is effective, but there is a more effective way.
1. Get all you friends together.
2. Buy the Universal CD's.
3. Open the packages.
4. Return them for a full refund as unplayable.
5. Get everybody in you school or community that you know to participate.
Should be real fun.
TOM
The getting around to argument:
The argument has substantial validity. Forcing Microsoft to publish the pre release information does not guarantee that they will publish the CORRECT information nor that they will publish changes. We have been here before. In 1995 many companes paid Microsoft for the Win-95 interface so their competing products would be ready when Win-95 rolled out. Word Perfect was one of the companies and had Word Perfect on the shelves the day WIN-95 hit the shelves. Problem (as you remember) was that it would not RUN. Microsoft had altered the Beta Release and told NO ONE. When the case hit the courts, Microsoft claimed that they did not want to mislead their clients so they held the final specifications and documentation until they could be certain that the final documentation was correct. When was this final documentation actually released (January 96 as I remember) six months after Windows95 and Office 95 hit the market. Word Perfect did not have their application rewritten until the following summer and their market share went from 65% to 25% (as I remember - I am becomming senile so these percentages may not be exact). Other companies such as Artisoft suffered from the same problem and are now no longer selling a competative network. We are not only talking the time delay here, but the cost and programmer burnout. The Word Perfect team worked long hours in a "Death March" (Yourdon) environment to complete the product by the Microsoft Release Date. The thought of starting over resulted in Word Perfect loosing many fine programmers who just could not crank themselves back up (Burnout).
Do not think (for a second) that Microsoft did not consider this when they elected NOT to release the changes to the Beta version. The court found for the plantifs, and Microsoft's Monopoly was solidified.
Slashdot Mirror
1. A patent search is not feasable even for large corporations. Even if you were able to identify some of that patents that MIGHT apply, you would not have the expertise to determine if they actually do apply. Even if you determined correctly that a particular patent does not apply, that does not mean that the patent holder would agree with you.
2. As someone else said, ignorance is bliss.
3. In your specific case it probably makes no difference. Unless the value of the product you are building exceeds the cost of enforcing the patent in the legal system the most you are likely to receive is a demand letter.
It is really sad that innovators can not build products without the fear of being crushed totally and everything the own being taken from tham by (what amounts to) a heartless system. We forget that many of the engineers the scientests that built our country in the 1800's came to the US to flee the European patent system that was crushing them. Think about that.
Tom
1. You never agreed to the EULA. Whether or not the EULA is even legal (or enforceable) is another matter.
2. You signed no form of pruchase (license)agreement with the seller (or I am assuming that you did not).
3. When you obtain a product from a seller that you have paid for, the expectation of ownership is very real.
4. Under copyright law the right for first sale should apply here regardless of what is written in the EULA which you never agreed to.
Simple solution.
Make a copy of the microsoft sticker on you machine. Remove the sticker to the best of you ability. Type a letter that states the purchase conditions and sign the letter. Sell the three items for whatever you can get for them thus reducing the cost of your machine.
You clearly never agreed to or signed the EULA, copyright law clearly restricts the copyholders rights here to the right-of-first-sale.
Tom
If the facts do not support you, pound the LAW. If the LAW does not support you, pound the Facts. If neither supports you, pound the table. If you pound the table hard enough, they put your opponent out of business.
Your wish list isn't even warm. You will have to settle for a subset. The last real attempt at a virtual machine was P-Code, and where many P machines were available, the system never caught on. The problem was speed. Microsoft's .net and Java make some attempt at cross platform operability, but there are restrictions and a huge performance degradation.
For any major application, even compilers like C++ will require custome libraries that are not available on all target platforms.
The only Computer Language that I know of which has true cross platform support is ADA. ADA is one of the most powerful programming languages available but try finding a programer the likes to program in ADA. Just the mention of ADA makes my stomach turn.
Sorry, you are not going to find what you are looking for.
TOM
Voting with you feet is effective, but there is a more effective way. 1. Get all you friends together. 2. Buy the Universal CD's. 3. Open the packages. 4. Return them for a full refund as unplayable. 5. Get everybody in you school or community that you know to participate. Should be real fun. TOM
The getting around to argument: The argument has substantial validity. Forcing Microsoft to publish the pre release information does not guarantee that they will publish the CORRECT information nor that they will publish changes. We have been here before. In 1995 many companes paid Microsoft for the Win-95 interface so their competing products would be ready when Win-95 rolled out. Word Perfect was one of the companies and had Word Perfect on the shelves the day WIN-95 hit the shelves. Problem (as you remember) was that it would not RUN. Microsoft had altered the Beta Release and told NO ONE. When the case hit the courts, Microsoft claimed that they did not want to mislead their clients so they held the final specifications and documentation until they could be certain that the final documentation was correct. When was this final documentation actually released (January 96 as I remember) six months after Windows95 and Office 95 hit the market. Word Perfect did not have their application rewritten until the following summer and their market share went from 65% to 25% (as I remember - I am becomming senile so these percentages may not be exact). Other companies such as Artisoft suffered from the same problem and are now no longer selling a competative network. We are not only talking the time delay here, but the cost and programmer burnout. The Word Perfect team worked long hours in a "Death March" (Yourdon) environment to complete the product by the Microsoft Release Date. The thought of starting over resulted in Word Perfect loosing many fine programmers who just could not crank themselves back up (Burnout). Do not think (for a second) that Microsoft did not consider this when they elected NOT to release the changes to the Beta version. The court found for the plantifs, and Microsoft's Monopoly was solidified.