Re: Pseudo-Patent-Free Microsoft Standard

[Seth Johnson <seth.johnson@RealMeasures.dyndns.org>]

Can anybody translate this?  Bernard is documenting MS
intent to attack free software by means of patents.

Seth

Bernard Lang wrote:
> 
> On Sat, Apr 06, 2002 at 10:02:57AM +0200, PILCH Hartmut wrote:
> > > (Microsoft just can't cope with the idea that standards
> > > are supposed to be used by everyone.  So they are hooking
> > > up their patents via their license.  We simply can't turn
> > > our back on them for one second.  -- Seth Johnson)
> > >
> > > http://www.advogato.org/article/453.html
> >
> > Unfortunately we still do not know about the EPO situation
> > concerning these Microsoft applications.  As usual, the US
> > patent doesn't contain information on a parallel EP or WO
> > patent application.  Yet these could very well exist.   In
> > 1993 the EPO was already granting patents on the most
> > abstract mathematical methods, and of course the above
> > claim language looked "technical" enough for the EPO to
> > consider it not pertaining to a programming solution as
> > such -- indeed it is more a problem than a solution that
> > is claimed.  Also, an application from 1993 would most
> > likely have been granted around 1998 by the EPO.
> >
> > For research into this, you may want to use
> >
> >         http://www.depatisnet.de/
> >         http://www.espacenet.com/
> >         http://www.delphion.com/
> >
> > Using a few key words from the two US applications (such
> > as Microsoft, "inventor"'s name, text strings from the
> > claims etc) should get you there.
> 
> I do not know whether that is essential, though proper
> information never hurts.
> 
> The data below seems more important to me, because it
> shows a systematic attack based on interoperability, using
> existing hold on the market to extend to new areas.  Very
> precisely what anti-trust regulation forbids.
> 
> Can someone translate precisely the excerpt from Heise
> 
> Auf die Ãffnung des .NET-Framework
> angesprochen, kündigte Ballmer an, dass es
> sicherlich eine
> Common-Language-Runtime-Implementation für
> Unix geben werde, schränkte diese Entwicklung
> jedoch als Subset ein, der "nur für den
> akademischen Einsatz gedacht sei". Ãberlegungen
> zur Unterstützung freier .NET-Implementationen
> wie Mono erteilte Ballmer eine Absage
> 
> "Wir haben so viele Millionen in .NET gesteckt,
> wir haben so viele Patente auf .NET, die wir
> pflegen wollen."
> 
> Reference:
>   Steve Ballmer: Kein Tänzchen an der Leine
>   Detlef Borchers, Heise online, 12.03.2002
>   http://www.heise.de/newsticker/data/jk-12.03.02-000/
>   
> http://www.heise.de/bin/nt.print/newsticker/data/jk-12.03.02-000/?id=bb59a8c6&todo=print
> 
> Bernard
> 
> PS Are there other speeches by Ballmer or others
> with similar statements ?  especially use of patents
> to kill open source.
> 
> > As MS is using these swpats for its crusades against
> > the GPL, We need to document this stuff quickly and
> > thouroughly, see also
> >
> >         http://swpat.ffii.org/news/index.en.html#m023E
> >
> > and some help would be very much appreciated.
> 
> --
>Non aux Brevets Logiciels  -  No to Software Patents
>SIGNEZ    http://petition.eurolinux.org/    SIGN
> 
>Bernard.Lang@inria.fr             ,_  /\o    \o/    Tel  +33 1 3963 5644
>http://pauillac.inria.fr/~lang/  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^  Fax  +33 1 3963 5469
>INRIA / B.P. 105 / 78153 Le Chesnay CEDEX / France
>Je n'exprime que mon opinion - I express only my opinion
>CAGED BEHIND WINDOWS or FREE WITH LINUX

-- 

[CC] Counter-copyright:
http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/cc/cc.html