- Related Stories
-
Still 'no demand' for media-player-free Windows
November 18, 2005 -
Microsoft not out of legal woods yet
October 11, 2005 -
Ballmer to meet with EU antitrust chief
September 29, 2005 -
Microsoft details EU concessions
June 6, 2005
EU's competition commissioner says her staff is analyzing whether offer will end dispute over daily fine for Redmond.
The story "Microsoft source code offer surprises EU" published January 26, 2006 at 4:31 AM is no longer available on CNET News.
Content from Reuters expires after 30 days.
... re: "For many years, anyone seeking to patent the use of a computer for functions that were previously performed manually had double trouble if the invention related to a ?way of doing business.? First, the Patent and Trademark Office decided that mathematical algorithms were not a statutory category of subject matter that could be protected by patent. Second, ?business methods? were held to be unpatentable. These two objections have been eroded over the years.
Recently, software inventions involving algorithms have been eligible for United States patents as long as tangible results are produced. Also, in the mid-1980s, Merrill Lynch won a court ruling that it was entitled to have a patent on its Cash Management System, which involved various types of processing of financial data by computer.
In 1998, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in the State Street case destroyed the last remnant of the ?method of doing business? objection to obtaining a patent. It ruled that no legal basis exists for such an exception to patentability and that if an invention otherwise meets the standards for patentability, there is no legitimate basis for denying the issuance of a patent. This ruling was made for a software invention that used computerized processing to establish a system for pooling of assets of mutual funds"; see link for the rest of the article:
http://www.tms.org/pubs/journals/JOM/matters/matters-0012.html
... re: "For many years, anyone seeking to patent the use of a computer for functions that were previously performed manually had double trouble if the invention related to a ?way of doing business.? First, the Patent and Trademark Office decided that mathematical algorithms were not a statutory category of subject matter that could be protected by patent. Second, ?business methods? were held to be unpatentable. These two objections have been eroded over the years.
Recently, software inventions involving algorithms have been eligible for United States patents as long as tangible results are produced. Also, in the mid-1980s, Merrill Lynch won a court ruling that it was entitled to have a patent on its Cash Management System, which involved various types of processing of financial data by computer.
In 1998, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in the State Street case destroyed the last remnant of the ?method of doing business? objection to obtaining a patent. It ruled that no legal basis exists for such an exception to patentability and that if an invention otherwise meets the standards for patentability, there is no legitimate basis for denying the issuance of a patent. This ruling was made for a software invention that used computerized processing to establish a system for pooling of assets of mutual funds"; see link for the rest of the article:
http://www.tms.org/pubs/journals/JOM/matters/matters-0012.html
If MS has or has not properly implemented its code, it would be better for everyone if their code if it can go under scrutiny
If MS has or has not properly implemented its code, it would be better for everyone if their code if it can go under scrutiny
Especially when the OSS heavyweights like Linus Torvalds openly state that documentation is worthless.
"A spec is close to useless. I have never seen a spec that was both big enough to be useful and accurate. And I have seen lots of total crap work that was based on specs. It's the single worst way to write software, because it by definition means that the software was written to match theory, not reality."
-Linus Torvalds
Especially when the OSS heavyweights like Linus Torvalds openly state that documentation is worthless.
"A spec is close to useless. I have never seen a spec that was both big enough to be useful and accurate. And I have seen lots of total crap work that was based on specs. It's the single worst way to write software, because it by definition means that the software was written to match theory, not reality."
-Linus Torvalds
if Microsoft needs someone to write about protocols they can get in touch with me.. I can make up to $12,000 a year and not have to report it.
if Microsoft needs someone to write about protocols they can get in touch with me.. I can make up to $12,000 a year and not have to report it.
at the source code and MS could claim any code you develop is a
derivative of their work. (a trick they may have picked up from
their buddies at SCO)
at the source code and MS could claim any code you develop is a
derivative of their work. (a trick they may have picked up from
their buddies at SCO)
- "well maybe it's....
-
by Captain_Spock
January 29, 2006 11:42 AM PST
- ... not worth their while developing for windows server anyway"; well, if such is the case, then why not "port" as well as "develop" applications for the "IBM's OS/2 WARP SERVER FOR E-BUSINESS"... this should present some compelling and competitive business opportunities now that it appears that the Windows Source-Code is soon to be available for free!
-
Reply to this comment
-
(28 Comments)