From: Alan Horkan (horkana_at_maths.tcd.ie)
Date: Mon Nov 17 2003 - 14:17:21 EST
On Mon, 17 Nov 2003, Rui Miguel Seabra wrote:
<snip>
> Microsoft may have patents and/or patent applications that are necessary
> for you to license in order to make, sell, or distribute software programs
> that read or write files that comply with the Microsoft specifications for
> the Office Schemas.
_may have_
I hate over reaching lawyers with disclaimers so vague as to be useless
but that seems to be what this is.
> So usage of MS Word XML files requires a patentlicense.
that remains to be seen, and seems highly unlikely.
If Dom has not already decided to ignore this thread entirely I'm sure he
will have something wise to say.
> You are not licensed to distribute a Licensed Implementation under license
> terms and conditions that prohibit the terms and conditions of this license.
> You are not licensed to sublicense or transfer your rights.
Abiword could still make an unlicensed implementation couldn't it?
> This is very good timing, and goes to show how important it is to ensure
> that the software patent directive has articles that protects interoperativity
> from consituting patentinfringemet.
Patents suck. Some patents suck more than others, software patents in
paticular. http://swpat.ffii.org/
The claimed patent information page is currently 404
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/en-us/odcXMLRef/html/odcXMLRefLegalNotice.asp?frame=true
cant argue with (or held to agree with ;) that can you?
Rui, it would have been nice if you had added some of your own comments,
or doubts rather than just forwarding this on verbatim but I'm sure we'll
hear your opinions soon enough.
Sincerely
Alan Horkan
http://advogato.org/person/AlanHorkan/
PS the article on slashdot might include some intelligent comments on the
matter (but I wouldn't hold my breath)
http://developers.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=86136
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Mon Nov 17 2003 - 14:16:25 EST