Compliance Toolkit
Story: Microsoft's antitrust concessions are 'pointless'
Posted by: Anonymous (Saturday 8 October 2005, 10:33 AM)
In response to Rod; you seem to contradict yourself re owning an idea. A patent is a licence, not an indication of ownership. Also it is possible to have a patent and never implement the invention to which it refers, hence your definition is incorrect. If this is an example of how you think it is not surprising that you are unable to appreciate why MS's behaviour is questionable. One further point; I am sure you know that MSDOS was in effect Microsoft acting like a parasite and using others creations (CP/M, unix, etc), rather than being innovative and creating it's own OS.
Full Talkback thread
Story: Microsoft's antitrust concessions are 'pointless'
-
Please tell me why Microsoft should give these par... Rod S. -
...
If they were so innovative, how come all... Anonymous -
Com'on,
What MS is doing is a joke. They... Bryan M. Chesmer -
To Rod S,
You are criticising the only group of pe... jc
-
Stalling tactics are contempt of court and should... Olav Petri
-
1) Where is is written that open source IS the bes... Rod S.
-
Rod S. is most probably a MCSE, who is scared... Ronald Trip
-
You can own an idea. You can own the fir... Rod S.
-
Agree EU should get out of the way... Jon
-
In response to Rod; you seem to con... Anonymous -
You cannot own an idea, so it is wrong to talk abo... M. Holder
-
It stands to reason that the EU has no clue yet as... Arthur B.
-
No Jon, the game needs to be played by certain rul... Arthur B.
-
Who says the cost of software is high?, gener... Jon
-
@ All advocates of ms and other monopoli... Q_Sourceror
-
Without a common operating system i... Jon
-
Dear Jon & All Other Readers,... Q_Sourceror
-
As previously quoted
"It seem... Jon
-
Jon,
You really do have very l... Keith Milner
-
To MS users, who do actual IT... Chin Teongli
-
@ Jon & others who, how exceptional !, really have... Q_Sourceror
-
Quoting from the (clueless) Jon:
"The world was ne... noJ
