Friday, April 27, 2007

Microsoft accused of patent infringement with .NET

Has this been posted yet? Anyhow the author of this article surely sounds like another Geekspeak msft shill to me!


portuno said...

Fortunately for us the validity of the infringement case will be at the hands of a court and a jury and not some folks who can't read very well and color what reading they do with prejudice and half-baked ideas.

At least there is at least one comment to that article worthy of merit:

Wise, Aged Ars Veteran

Tribus: NE Pennsylvania, USA
Registered: March 21, 2002
Posts: 4994

Posted April 25, 2007 14:24 Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete Message
Ars contacted MS for a comment, but there is no mention of contacting SiteFlash (other than surfing their web pages). Is this the case?

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...

Truth is there is going to be a train load of this polite 'whos that sniffing the pie' as developers and entrenched users wonder about what possible outcomes might lie ahead..,guid,dbc33a4a-43bf-4fcd-9e09-b59242bd79a0.aspx

Anonymous said...

So Arstechnica
switched over in 2004 to .net and did a heavy duty analysis of it in 2002---article is no surprise

morrie33 said...

"Contingency" is the keyword here. All the geekstrokes of the world can't explain why a prestigious Chicago lawfirm would take 9 months of their time before filing a "cease and desist" order?

Does the prestigious Chicago Law Firm want to spend another 12-18-24 months of their time while this makes it's way through a Texas court?

I would imagine that a prestigious Chicago law firm who specializes in patent law would have some pretty valuable "techhead" employees look at a case before they took it on contingency. And then they would have those same or other "techhead" employees assure them about the finer points of a case before they filed a CEASE AND DESIST ORDER AGAINST MICROSOFT...

If anyone hasn't noticed Microsoft ain't JOE BLOW'S SOFTWARE. This is a big deal suing microsoft...for free.

It might just be me, but I doubt that the partners of this prestigious law firm want to be known as the lawfirm that sued microsoft and spent 3 years of their time and got nothing out of it...

I think I'll trust the rational facts stated above rather than some shill who looks at it for less than 2 hours and says, "microsoft has nothing to worry about." I mean compared to a prestigious patent law firm that has taken 9 months before they filed a "cease and desist order."

I hope microsoft keeps believing their little bloggers that they have nothing to worry about. I'm sure the billions microsoft has already lost in patent cases was never going to happen according to these bloggers. But...those settlements and lawsuits that microsoft lost would signify otherwise...

Anonymous said...

As someone mentioned---this law firm has been at Microsoft before?
They know whats in front of them. It will be entertaining, at least for me, to establish the link in bias with the various opinions that will surface. The outfit above is apparently infused with .net (as user and developer?) and likely planned that piece carefully.

Anonymous said...

Perhaps someone should send that first link I posted to NIRO---just as possible supporting evidence.
Maybe they could use it in an openning statement----"Even public discussion in 2002 was clearly identifying infringement."

I defer to the

Anonymous said...

No worries