- From: by way of Susan Lesch <seth.johnson@realmeasures.dyndns.org>
- Date: Sun, 7 Apr 2002 17:34:21 -0700
- To: www-patentpolicy-comment@w3.org
[Moderator note: This mail was sent to To: Bernard Lang <Bernard.Lang@inria.fr> and CC: patents@aful.org, C-FIT_Community@realmeasures.dyndns.org, C-FIT_Release_Community@realmeasures.dyndns.org, www-patentpolicy-comment@w3.org, fairuse-discuss@mrbrklyn.com, usenet@consulting.net.nz, rms@gnu.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, schrÃ?nkte 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
Received on Sunday, 7 April 2002 20:34:24 UTC