M$ Litigation against Linux

[Jack]

--- Arthur Pemberton <pemboa at gmail.com> wrote:

> On 10/12/07, Luke -Jr <luke at dashjr.org> wrote:
> > On Friday 12 October 2007, you wrote:
> > > On 10/12/07, Luke -Jr <luke at dashjr.org> wrote:
> > > > On Friday 12 October 2007, Arthur Pemberton
> wrote:
> > > > > On 10/12/07, Jestin Stoffel
> <jestin.stoffel at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > On Fri, 2007-10-12 at 11:25 -0700, Julie
> wrote:
> > > > > > > Some of you may find the msg threads to
> this article a bit
> > > > > > > "interesting". ;)
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> http://blogs.zdnet.com/Berlind/?p=833&tag=nl.e589
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The conspiracy theory that Microsoft is
> behind this suit falls
> > > > > > somewhere between alarmist nonsense and
> obviousness.
> > > > >
> > > > > It could just be a coincidence that this
> happened right on the heals
> > > > > of Balmer's latest threats. And it could
> just be a coincidence that
> > > > > the patent holder if isn't also suing
> Microsoft.
> > > >
> > > > Microsoft doesn't violate it, unless that's
> something new in Vista.
> > >
> > > Aren't we talking about virtual desktops? Or did
> I misunderstand the
> > > scope of the patent?
> >
> > Indeed, a concept foreign to Windows.
> 
> Microsoft has powertoys, Nvidia has an app for this
> also... two big
> companies with virtual desktop support for Windows.
> 
> 
> -- 
> Fedora 7 : sipping some of that moonshine
> ( www.pembo13.com )
> _______________________________________________
> Kclug mailing list
> Kclug at kclug.org
> http://kclug.org/mailman/listinfo/kclug
> 
Not to mention Microsoft's own virtual desktop
application. I use it all thew time in professional
settings. Windows definitely does fit the category of
this patents.
Oh and it's just a coincidence that two of Microsoft's
brightest, one an IP lawyer, just happen to have been
hired very very recently by this patent troll. Oh, yes
it's definitely alarmist to draw annnnnnnnny
connection. If I were a prosecutor  and this were a
crime, I'd consider all the "coincidences" rather
strong circumstantial evidence. MS is to smart to
actually get caught too deeply involved, however
accidents happen and people slip up. Stay tuned for
more. I'm sure something will happen. I don't give
this suit a prayer. considering that there is a tin of
prior art, and there were applications already on the
market that did this before the patent was even
granted. Anyone remember Norton Desktop and Norton
Desktop for Windows? That was released before August
1991, I don't know the exact date, but there is an
August NYT article on it. Five full months before the
patent was approved.
 Not to mention a ton of much earlier work in Unix
desktops. I wish someone with a boatload of money
would go through the IP stack of this patent troll and
get the bulk of their patents invalidated. Also, there
may be a bit of a conflict of interest here, as it
seems their attorney is also a judge in the district
in which they filed. Not sure if that's even allowed
by Bar Ethics.