Re: [Linux-aus] Microsoft in big poo in court and with US SEC

[Con Zymaris <conz@cyber.com.au>]

On Sun, Feb 23, 2003 at 12:30:54PM +0800, Leon Brooks wrote:
> On Sunday 23 February 2003 02:44 am, Jeff Waugh wrote:
> > <quote who="Leon Brooks">
> >> Not antitrust this time, just malicious stupidity and some knock-on
> >> effects:
> 
> >> "SQL Server developers face huge royalty bills. How many, how much?"
> 
> > It would be really cool if anything remotely approaching negative advocacy
> > were off-topic for this list.
> 
> It's positive advocacy. Our SQL database has been carefully kept free of 
> patented algorithms, never has had them, never will, and this is why.


It's important that advocates of FOSS know and understand these cases. 

I often hear that large firms are hesitant to deploy FOSS due to the
possibility of these kinds of legal wrangles, and how going with large
established players' products (i.e Microsoft's) is an easy choice due to
supposed legal disclosures and indemnification. Truth is, the EULA
disclaims both of these, and further, Microsoft _knew_ they were putting
their clients in the legal mire in this case, yet did nothing about it for
several years. In fact, they publically stated their was no risk to their
clients.

As said, knowing and understanding cases such as this, helps enlighten our
audience; whilst FOSS is not immune to IP issues, neither is Microsoft.
It's best to go with the platform and development methodology which has
encountered fewer of these problems over the years, decreasing your
organisation's risk profile. And FOSS has by far a better track record
here.

con

-- 
_____________________________________________________________________________
Con Zymaris <conz@cyber.com.au> Level 4, 10 Queen St, Melbourne 03 9621 2377 
*** Cybersource: We Have Moved. Please note new Address & Phone details. ***
Specialists in Unix/Linux, TCP/IP and Web App. Development  www.cyber.com.au