[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Microsoft and TomTom settle

From: Rjack
Subject: Re: Microsoft and TomTom settle
Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2009 07:08:01 -0400
User-agent: Thunderbird (Windows/20090302)

Alexander Terekhov wrote:
Rjack wrote:
7 wrote:
Rjack the stupid 1 wrote:

"Microsoft and TomTom have settled their controversial patent dispute, which included allegations that the Linux kernel infringes on Microsoft's filesystem patents. TomTom has licensed the patents from Microsoft, but intends to remove from its Linux kernel the code that is covered by the patents."

That is one of the fastest settlements I have seen for a big corp. Usually propellor heads will rachet up the ante all day
 and all night for years before making a move.

I wonder what forced micoshaft to change their mind?
Even a turd head like you is capable reading the rest of referenced article:

"TomTom has paid to license Microsoft's patents, including those covering FAT."

SFLC's spin-doctoring:
------ March 30, 2009

Settled, But Not Over Yet

Today's settlement between Microsoft and TomTom ends one phase of
 the community's response to Microsoft patent aggression,

Is "patent aggression" (being a patent plaintiff) anything like
"copyright aggression?" (being a copyright plaintiff)?

Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and
then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy
brother's eye ...

and begins another. On the basis of the information we have, we have no reason to believe that TomTom's settlement agreement with
 Microsoft violates the license on the kernel, Linux, or any
other free software used in its products. The settlement neither implies that Microsoft patents are valid nor that TomTom's products were or are infringing.

The FAT filesystem patents on which Microsoft sued are now and have always been invalid patents in our professional opinion.

"In our 'Professional' opinion"? This from "Professionals" who filed
five consecutive copyright infringement cases for clients who had no
registered copyrights. ROFL

SFLC remains committed to protecting the interests of our clients
and the community. We will act forcefully to protect all users and developers of free software against further intimidation or interference from these patents.

SFLC, working with the Open Invention Network and the Linux Foundation, is pleased to participate in a coordinated, carefully graduated response on behalf of all the community's members to ongoing anti-competitive Microsoft conduct. We believe in strength through unity, and we think our community's unity in the
 face of these threats has helped to bring about Microsoft's
quick settlement on all issues with TomTom. ------


Red Hat's "Legal Team":

------ Comment on TomTom-Microsoft Settlement

by Legal Team

Red Hat was not a party to this case. Even so, without a judicial
 decision, the settlement does not demonstrate that the claims of
Microsoft were valid. Patent litigation is a difficult process, and there are many reasons besides the merits of the case that a defendant such as TomTom might have chosen to settle in the present economic environment. As the terms of the settlement license have not, to our knowledge, been made public, it is not possible to comment on their compliance with open source requirements and principles.

This entry was posted by Legal Team on Monday, March 30th, 2009 at 2:58 pm and is filed under IP. You can follow any responses to
 this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are
 currently closed.

Comments are closed. ------

regards, alexander.

-- (GNG is a derecursive recursive derecursion which pwns GNU since it can be infinitely looped as GNGNGNGNG...NGNGNG... and can be said backwards too, whereas GNU cannot.)

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]