I am not one who likes lawsuits or believe in suing, but as an open source software user and writer, I may have to encourage just that. It seems to me that Microsoft is mobilizing its lawyer corps and is using its patent portfolios in order to deter Linux users. Microsoft is also vulnerable in this same area. Microsoft has settled with several companies regarding software patents. There is also another area in which I can see that Microsoft is vulnerable. This area concerns the amount of viruses, spam, trojans, spyware, and other malware that is spread by Microsoft's lack of security.
Yes, I know that people that use Microsoft products are forced to agree to their E.U.L.A. and that E.U.L.A. does away with customers' options to sue Microsoft for damages caused by their product. I also know of many who do not use Microsoft's products and are still affected by Microsoft's products' lack of security. I am one of these people. I use Linux at work, home, and on my webhosting service and at each one of these places, I have to deal with spam. This spam is in many cases sent by unwitting Microsoft users whos computers have contracted spam spewing worms. While they are effective blocked from suing Microsoft, I am not. Neither are the thousands of ISP's around the country who have to pay for the costs of filtering, storing, blocking, and receiving spam. If Microsoft's insecurity is a contributing factor in the transmission of any kind of attack and that attack ends up costing people who have not agreed to any of Microsoft's E.U.L.A.'s, then Microsoft may be responsible for its share of the cost.
Here is the costs to employers. If you do not use Microsoft's products, just ask yourself this question, "How much time do I spend at work filtering and deleting virus and spam email?" Take that time and convert to hours. Multiply the hours by your pay rate. Have other non Microsoft-using employees at your job site do the same. Add these costs together. Now take the total amount and multiply by the estimated percentage of spam spread by spam-spewing software which was spread by Microsoft's software vulnerabilities. This is the amount Microsoft costs your employer.
Now look at your ISP. If your ISP does not use Microsoft's products, they have a case too. Figure out the total bandwith used by spam. Multiply this figure by the percentage of SPAM sent by Microsoft's insecurities. Do the same for denial of service attacks. Add these figures together. If your ISP pays for virus, spam, and D.O.S. filtering and blocking, you can multiply cost of these by the persentage of attacks caused by Microsoft's insecurities. Add the blocking and bandwidth costs together, and you get what Microsoft costs your ISP.
Yes, it also costs governments. Look at how much it costs the government to produce computer security programs. Multiply this cost by the percentage of problems caused by Microsoft's insecurities. You get the amount of money Microsoft costs governments for computer security programs.
How much does Microsoft's insecurities cost you? Your ISP has to make a profit. So do most employers. Higher costs gives governments excuses to raise taxes. All these costs are passed to you in one way or another. You also have to filter spam, viruses and such from your emails, how much time does that cost you? Does this sound like it can make for many lawsuits? I sounds like it to me. So, I would recommend that Microsoft be very careful about how it uses it legal clout.
I'm sick and tired of all the monopolies hiding behind intellectual property laws. Patents and copyrights were originally intended for someone who has a great idea to have a chance sell their idea by making a product or work and putting it on the market. Of course, nowdays, in order to get a patent, one has to spend tens of thousands of dollars just to go through the paprework. I don't have tens of thousand of dollars to have my ideas protected. My only other choice is to go to a big company and present my idea to it. If I'm lucky, this company will use my idea and pay me a small royalty. However, in many cases, a company will say they have developed a similar idea, patent the idea themselve and rake in all the cash. Companies will use their clout to govern how people use their product. Microsoft or any other company has no right in legally stopping people from modifying X-boxes to suit their needs anymore than GM or Ford has a right to stop people from painting their cars a different color.
Slashdot Mirror
I am not one who likes lawsuits or believe in suing, but as an open source software user and writer, I may have to encourage just that. It seems to me that Microsoft is mobilizing its lawyer corps and is using its patent portfolios in order to deter Linux users. Microsoft is also vulnerable in this same area. Microsoft has settled with several companies regarding software patents. There is also another area in which I can see that Microsoft is vulnerable. This area concerns the amount of viruses, spam, trojans, spyware, and other malware that is spread by Microsoft's lack of security.
Yes, I know that people that use Microsoft products are forced to agree to their E.U.L.A. and that E.U.L.A. does away with customers' options to sue Microsoft for damages caused by their product. I also know of many who do not use Microsoft's products and are still affected by Microsoft's products' lack of security. I am one of these people. I use Linux at work, home, and on my webhosting service and at each one of these places, I have to deal with spam. This spam is in many cases sent by unwitting Microsoft users whos computers have contracted spam spewing worms. While they are effective blocked from suing Microsoft, I am not. Neither are the thousands of ISP's around the country who have to pay for the costs of filtering, storing, blocking, and receiving spam. If Microsoft's insecurity is a contributing factor in the transmission of any kind of attack and that attack ends up costing people who have not agreed to any of Microsoft's E.U.L.A.'s, then Microsoft may be responsible for its share of the cost.
Here is the costs to employers. If you do not use Microsoft's products, just ask yourself this question, "How much time do I spend at work filtering and deleting virus and spam email?" Take that time and convert to hours. Multiply the hours by your pay rate. Have other non Microsoft-using employees at your job site do the same. Add these costs together. Now take the total amount and multiply by the estimated percentage of spam spread by spam-spewing software which was spread by Microsoft's software vulnerabilities. This is the amount Microsoft costs your employer.
Now look at your ISP. If your ISP does not use Microsoft's products, they have a case too. Figure out the total bandwith used by spam. Multiply this figure by the percentage of SPAM sent by Microsoft's insecurities. Do the same for denial of service attacks. Add these figures together. If your ISP pays for virus, spam, and D.O.S. filtering and blocking, you can multiply cost of these by the persentage of attacks caused by Microsoft's insecurities. Add the blocking and bandwidth costs together, and you get what Microsoft costs your ISP.
Yes, it also costs governments. Look at how much it costs the government to produce computer security programs. Multiply this cost by the percentage of problems caused by Microsoft's insecurities. You get the amount of money Microsoft costs governments for computer security programs.
How much does Microsoft's insecurities cost you? Your ISP has to make a profit. So do most employers. Higher costs gives governments excuses to raise taxes. All these costs are passed to you in one way or another. You also have to filter spam, viruses and such from your emails, how much time does that cost you? Does this sound like it can make for many lawsuits? I sounds like it to me. So, I would recommend that Microsoft be very careful about how it uses it legal clout.
I'm sick and tired of all the monopolies hiding behind intellectual property laws. Patents and copyrights were originally intended for someone who has a great idea to have a chance sell their idea by making a product or work and putting it on the market. Of course, nowdays, in order to get a patent, one has to spend tens of thousands of dollars just to go through the paprework. I don't have tens of thousand of dollars to have my ideas protected. My only other choice is to go to a big company and present my idea to it. If I'm lucky, this company will use my idea and pay me a small royalty. However, in many cases, a company will say they have developed a similar idea, patent the idea themselve and rake in all the cash. Companies will use their clout to govern how people use their product. Microsoft or any other company has no right in legally stopping people from modifying X-boxes to suit their needs anymore than GM or Ford has a right to stop people from painting their cars a different color.