Desktop platforms Toolkit

Story: Gates: Restricting IP rights is tantamount to communism

• 
• 

Brent. Sigh. Communism has nothing to do with Bill Gates real goals. It's just another way of him to try to get the discussions towards unrelated topics. Hoping that decisions will be made emotionally. That's what FUD is all about. The last thing Bill Gates wants is to have real business decisions based on real facts and real findings.

As for OpenOffice. It looks like you're lacking a certain amount of skills, knowledge and experience. Otherwise why would so many not have the problems you describe with OpenOffice?

As for IP. Simple question: did you do something as basic as 'follow the money'? Did you do background research concerning the details about what kind of IP companies like Microsoft are lobbying for? Have you figured out how on earth it was possible how we could have gotten this far without that kind of IP but now, suddenly, need that kind of IP to 'move on'? And what exactly is what they want us to 'move on' to?
And suppose you would hold one patent on some piece of software and, say, Microsoft decides to use it anyway for free. How would you be certain that you can succesfully sue Microsoft (without getting bankrupted along the way) and absolutely be sure that you don't, in any way, violate any of Microsoft's 30000 patents like 'one-click', 'moving a cursor by means of a mouse', and so on? Because that's the kind of patents we're talking about. Many of them already granted and ready to put to use once the politicians rubberstamp the 'that kind of IP' proposal. and turn it into law.

As for "greed". That has nothing to do with innovation. And innovation in itself has nothing to do with how superior (by what definition in which context?) something is. "Greed" is about wanting more and more without end. And having total control over various markets would certainly help those who are in favour of "greed". Question is: how does one get and keep total control of even just one market? By releasing a continues flow of innovative products? Patented products, perhaps? Not exactly because history has shown that the right amount of PR, lobbying, cornering, arm twisting, sponsering and bending a few laws here and there ("greed") leads to much greater succes then just having 'superior' products ("innovative") or even copywrited ones ("patented").

Also, quote: "If US "greed" actually did not lead to innovation, then why has not a single company been able to create a product superior to Microsfot Office?" might be better worded if you would put it like this: "If "greed" leads to illegal total cornering of the market, then why has not a single legally operating company been able to create a product just as commercially succesfull for themselves as Microsoft Office is for Microsoft?". Well, I would hope that you know the answer to that one.

• 
• 

• 
• 
• 

Full Talkback thread