RE: [DotGNU] the .NET API patent issue

[Timothy Rue]

On 10-Oct-03 09:13:18 José Ignacio Merino Martín <address@hidden> wrote:
 JIM> The code doesn't matter. In US you can patent an algorithm, or a
 JIM> prime number (it's true, there's a prime number patented for an
 JIM> encriptation algorithm and no one can use it without pay), or
 JIM> the "one click buy" of Amazon, of the gif format, ...

[SNIP]

I've scanned over this subject, and the emca related one.

The fact of the matter is that FSF is rather passive when it comes to
Legal IP issues.

It would do the FSF good to hire some agressive criminal lawyers.

Why? Because IP laws are not the only way to deal with the world around
you.

I seem to recall Microsoft encouraging external efforts to clone .net and
for MS to now change that, after so much has been done, is to commit a
crime of entrapment. Prove it and even if MS patents here are upheld as
valid patents, they will not be enforceable.

There is also public document showing MS used ".net" as a marketing tool
or hype word that they themselves really weren't very clear about. Sorta
of a blank piece of paper to let the public and external efforts fill in
the description of as they claim rights to it. Piracy and thieft of hat
the public comes up with (what is clearly not unique or novel)?

It was also communicated early on the question of was it wise to follow
MS. Not over concern of IP but of concern over the validity of .net as it
applies to the spirit of non-proprietary mindset. A drug addict cannot
think in terms of genuine solution to addiction, cept to stay addicted
(that is why there is external help for such.) And in the same way,
following MS innovation mentality is to become addicted to that mindset.

Some time ago I posted a summary of the EMCA .net related documents on
this list or a connected list. Nothing is described in those document that
couldn't have been done by any other company or group in the way of
collecting up programming language information, concepts and datatypes
and boiling it all down into an non-conflicting integration applied thru a
intermediate language that runs on a common or standardized execution
engine.

Some of what I have read in the posts here gives me the impression that
there is an undercurrent support for MS manipulations. Are some of we
becomming addicted by MS mindset?

Snap out of it!!!

---
Timothy Rue
Email @ mailto:address@hidden
Web @ http://threeseas.net