Comments on: Linux, Balmer and flying pigs http://www.p2pnet.net/story/10547 p2pnet.net - reader powered Wed, 01 Feb 2012 15:11:09 -0300 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: Reader's Write http://www.p2pnet.net/story/10547/comment-page-1#comment-131017 Reader's Write Fri, 01 Dec 2006 07:00:54 +0000 #comment-131017 Hold on, if only MS has access to its sources, is it really fair to say that some one is "infringing" on their intellectual property when they infringe on their copyrights/patents. I mean, if they aren't available to the public, then any one who comes up with an idea that happens to infringe upon these copyrights/patents did it unintentionally, since they obviously didn't have access to the sources, and since they came upon their ideas on their own, aren't they entitled to their own claim to acopyright/patent? Hold on, if only MS has access to its sources, is it really fair to say that some one is “infringing” on their intellectual property when they infringe on their copyrights/patents. I mean, if they aren’t available to the public, then any one who comes up with an idea that happens to infringe upon these copyrights/patents did it unintentionally, since they obviously didn’t have access to the sources, and since they came upon their ideas on their own, aren’t they entitled to their own claim to acopyright/patent?

]]> By: Reader's Write http://www.p2pnet.net/story/10547/comment-page-1#comment-130886 Reader's Write Sun, 26 Nov 2006 10:04:58 +0000 #comment-130886 "I strongly doubt that there can be software copyright infringement" The article is talking about patents, not copyright. And patents can be infringed without the access to the source code. This is why there is a movement against software patents - http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/ AFAIK. “I strongly doubt that there can be software copyright infringement”

The article is talking about patents, not copyright. And patents can be infringed without the access to the source code. This is why there is a movement against software patents – http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/

AFAIK.

]]> By: Reader's Write http://www.p2pnet.net/story/10547/comment-page-1#comment-130879 Reader's Write Sat, 25 Nov 2006 20:22:14 +0000 #comment-130879 "only Microsoft has access to most of its source code so it isn't all that difficult for it to prove – to itself at any rate – that there are IP infringements contained in Linux." I strongly doubt that there can be software copyright infringement if the source code was never seen by alleged infringer, because only Microsoft had access to its source code. Just imagine. Songwriter A writes a song on a piece of paper and then stores the paper where no one can see it. Never copyright registers the song. It is then possible for Songwriter B to write a very similar song, by chance. Since B never saw A's song, he is not an infringer. BTW, for Microsoft to sue for copyright infringement of a software source code, the source code must be copyright registered first. A law requirement. That means making the code public. I understand that Microsoft registers the appearance of Windows and not the source code. Surely if Microsoft copyright registers their code, the code will be scrutinized for infringement of someone else's code, by many programmers. After all, Microsoft has a lot of money and nakes a very good target. What does this all mean? Microsoft may not want to sue and anyway maynot have any case. Rafael Venegas http://www.gvenegas.com “only Microsoft has access to most of its source code so it isn’t all that difficult for it to prove – to itself at any rate – that there are IP infringements contained in Linux.”

I strongly doubt that there can be software copyright infringement if the source code was never seen by alleged infringer, because only Microsoft had access to its source code.

Just imagine. Songwriter A writes a song on a piece of paper and then stores the paper where no one can see it. Never copyright registers the song. It is then possible for Songwriter B to write a very similar song, by chance. Since B never saw A’s song, he is not an infringer.

BTW, for Microsoft to sue for copyright infringement of a software source code, the source code must be copyright registered first. A law requirement. That means making the code public. I understand that Microsoft registers the appearance of Windows and not the source code.

Surely if Microsoft copyright registers their code, the code will be scrutinized for infringement of someone else’s code, by many programmers. After all, Microsoft has a lot of money and nakes a very good target.

What does this all mean? Microsoft may not want to sue and anyway maynot have any case.

Rafael Venegas
http://www.gvenegas.com

]]>