Comments on: Microsoft e-mail proposal dealt setback

The Internet Engineering Task Force decides that the software giant's gift horse could be a Trojan horse.

Bigger issue with open source and standards

The Sender ID patent problem shows that open source is not compatible with commercial software and will negatively impact future joint standards. Open source requires all parties to submit to shared intellectual property rules and prohibits ownership of intellectual knowledge. I don't believe shared knowledge should be the only source for standards, which means we have a serious problem.

The internet is open source software

On the contrary, most of the internet that you and me use is of open source nature.
No one owns the internet by itself. Microsoft wants to but no, the internet does not belong to Microsoft. And yet commerical software thrives on the Internet.
This is because most people understands that for anything to work on the Internet, it must done with all the parties collabaration. Meaning there must be a clear, free for all to see, and implement protocol specifications.
What Microsoft did was wrong because it wants to make everyone to agree to their method by submitting their Sender ID solution as part of the Internet architecture.
In other words, Microsoft tries to own a piece of the Internet by brute marketing force.
So, other parties have everyone right not to use it and let the Sender ID solution dies.
p.s. IBM is making a lot of money using open source software. Who says open source is anti commerical?
Maybe for some people they should at least have an open mind, even they will never let the software open source.

That's not the issue.

"The Sender ID patent problem shows that open source is not
compatible with commercial software and will negatively impact
future joint standards."

You're confused. Open source is inseparable from open
standards. Microsoft is the one that's not compatible. They're
not compatible with openness, standards, fairness or quality.
This doesn't surprise me at all. Their behavior is becoming all
too predictable.

Spam & Sender ID are evil

Sender ID is the same idiotic scheme CAUCE was pushing in their first days.

It's clear that the general push is to eliminate all of the aspects of the net that made it robust and compatible with free speech and privacy rights so that it can better serve those who are truly POWER crazed.

Microsoft's objective...

... is not to prevent spam. They just want to make sure they
profit from it. If you can control access and charge for it, you
don't want to throttle the traffic, you just want to funnel it all
through your toll booth. If Microsoft had their way, you wouldn't
see any less garbage in your in-box; the only difference you'd
see is that it comes with Microsoft's seal of approval, meaning
they've taken their cut.

[alek_nedic]

garbage in your in-box

http://www.analogstereo.com/vacuum/miele_500_600_vacuum_chart.htm