[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [DotGNU]IBM, Microsoft plot Net takeover

From: David Sugar
Subject: Re: [DotGNU]IBM, Microsoft plot Net takeover
Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2002 16:33:20 -0400
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:0.9.8) Gecko/20020204

As far as I recall, the patents involved refer to specific "extensions" to SOAP, rather than to a reference or "standard" implimentation. One could simply, for example, create an "extension" to HTTP and then similarly misuse the patent system to make some patent claim on it (https? :), but this does not invalidate or encumber the original standard or reference implimentations of the original standard or our ability to create free software for or using the original standard. The risk is one where the extension becomes a defacto standard onto itself or one a maliable standards body might wish to endorse, like what happened to https. With the way current patent laws are enforced in this country, this can potentially happen to any protocol family and represents a common risk to software freedom everywhere. Certainly it is not a specific problem unique to SOAP.

Barry Fitzgerald wrote:

Bill Lance wrote:

     1) Fight the patent

That's not to likely to be productive.

Well, that depends on whether or not there is prior art.  If there is,
then their patent is invalid.  Since SOAP is a derivitive of other
transports - I'm willing to bet that there is significant prior art. The trick beyond that is getting a legal fund and a lawyer to beat the
patent.  If we absolutely have to implement SOAP, it's an option.

     2) Not use SOAP

Which is done by the community depends on how
important SOAP becomes.  I
suspect that patent encumbering SOAP will only kill
SOAP over time.

If MapPoint is an example of the  pricing, it's likely
to be a lot quicker than 'over time'.  What amazes me
about the Hailstorm fiasco is that MS seemed to invest
so heavily in the model with what, in hind site, must
have been NO competent market research into it's real

Heh - well, it's Microsoft.  They seem to think that the world is on
their side regardless of what they do.  I think that's why they dodged
through the anti-trust trial so much. It's not that they were lying. They actually seem to think that everything they do has consumer
benefit, even if it's sole purpose is to take cash out of consumer
pockets and put it into the MS bank account.  Some of what's going on
must really be a wake-up call for them.

Developers mailing list

reply via email to

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