Sad thing about this is there is some developers at Microsoft right now working on this, for as many possible hours per day all through the holiday just to fix and remove the features. They couldn't have waited until January 4th to drop this?
Court: Microsoft violated patent; can't sell Word
111–120 of 126 posts
Re: Court: Microsoft violated patent; can't sell Word
#112Earlier quoted context omitted.
RSA. But you're still correct.
Here's my hypothesis: The less obvious a software "invention" is, the more closely it resembles patenting pure mathematics. Unfortunately, a severe shortage of non-obvious software patents makes this hypothesis difficult to test.
of course, patenting mathematics isn't allowed :)
Re: Court: Microsoft violated patent; can't sell Word
#113Earlier quoted context omitted.
IIRC i4i is not a patent troll. It's a company with real products, users and - and that prevents it from being called a patent troll - probably licenses the patents from others. I am all in for banning obvious or bad patents, as well as shortening their duration, but, perhaps, the i4i patents may be really original or innovative. Microsoft is known for talking partnership, maybe acquisition, learning all they can and…
I mean, they're not a troll in the way that they're developing their product, but they're a troll in the way that their patent is for a way of editing custom XML. Really?
They have declared OpenOffice.org does not infringe. The patent then must be something pretty narrow.
Re: Court: Microsoft violated patent; can't sell Word
#114Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'd argue that, rather than banning software patents outright, the process by which these patents are approved should be put under high scrutiny and changed. For a lot of large companies, the approach really is similar to throwing everything against the wall and seeing what sticks. Having gone through the process recently, I'm amazed at how easy it is for an engineer to conceive an idea, pitch it to a few paralegals…
> Getting rid of software patents altogether is quite extreme. Really? I'd think that most people in software have the opinion that there should be no software patents at all. It's kind of silly, frankly.
> Really? I'd think that most people in software have the opinion that there should be no software patents at all.
Do you have any evidence for this? I know very intelligent people (both software developers and CS researchers) who think that software patents are not only necessary, but moral.
Re: Court: Microsoft violated patent; can't sell Word
#115Earlier quoted context omitted.
OO.org Writer is adequate for 90% of Word's users. I wrote a book a few years ago, and the editors used Word. Corresponding with them by using OO.org was not too difficult; all the features were there, although not completely polished. I looked at the features I thought were unpolished a few years ago again recently (I am not a big word processor fan), and they are fine now. OO.org Writer is now basically Word withou…
OO.org Writer will be adequate as soon as they come out with a decent Outline view. Until then, I and a whole whack of other people are staying on XP rather than Ubuntu primarily because OO.org lacks this one feature! http://qa.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3959
If it's such a big issue, why not implement it yourself? Then you and a whole whack of other people can switch from XP to Ubuntu!
Re: Court: Microsoft violated patent; can't sell Word
#116Earlier quoted context omitted.
The best way to get a bad law repealed is to enforce it strictly. --Abraham Lincoln
Except this doesn't apply here in the least. Microsoft has a lot more to gain from strict patent enforcement than it has to lose. This is hardly a good reason for Microsoft to give up all of the effort they've put into their software patent portfolio.
I don't think they have enforced a single patent and they have paid out ~1billion to patent trolls so I find it hard to believe patents are a net gain for them.
Re: Court: Microsoft violated patent; can't sell Word
#117This is good. We need more of these things to happen so that we can get some power behind the anti-software-patent lobby. Software patents have to become too dangerous to keep around, and that happens by things like this; right now, Microsoft and others use patents to lord over Linux and make vague threats about litigation. This is an important part of Microsoft's strategy, so software patents are important to them.…
I'd argue that, rather than banning software patents outright, the process by which these patents are approved should be put under high scrutiny and changed. For a lot of large companies, the approach really is similar to throwing everything against the wall and seeing what sticks. Having gone through the process recently, I'm amazed at how easy it is for an engineer to conceive an idea, pitch it to a few paralegals…
[deleted]
Re: Court: Microsoft violated patent; can't sell Word
#118Earlier quoted context omitted.
OO.org Writer will be adequate as soon as they come out with a decent Outline view. Until then, I and a whole whack of other people are staying on XP rather than Ubuntu primarily because OO.org lacks this one feature! http://qa.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3959
If it's such a big issue, why not implement it yourself? Then you and a whole whack of other people can switch from XP to Ubuntu!
Have you considered that maybe they aren't a programmer and don't have the technical knowledge to add a feature like that? This kind of attitude is one of the things that drives people away from Linux and the open-source movement in general.
Personally: every time I use OO, I'm reminded of how much better Word is--in interface (the ribbon is GREAT), features (everything you could ever need), compatibility (you can save in PDF), etc.
Re: Court: Microsoft violated patent; can't sell Word
#119Earlier quoted context omitted.
I mean, they're not a troll in the way that they're developing their product, but they're a troll in the way that their patent is for a way of editing custom XML. Really?
They have declared OpenOffice.org does not infringe. The patent then must be something pretty narrow.
Here's the patent in question:
http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sec...
It's not really.
Re: Court: Microsoft violated patent; can't sell Word
#120Office/Word won't drop off store shelves for any period of time. In the months since this case was initially filed and the injunction granted, Microsoft rewrote the small bit of Word code the company claims infringes to no longer use that method. They reprinted the Office CDs, repackaged and are shipping out new copies to be on shelves before the day the injunction ends.