Re: microsoft vs opensource
Miles Fidelman wrote:
i understand that. maybe i did not put my question right. i should like
a short answer that concerns the content/heart of this matter.
yup - they're called lawyers (or less polite terms, depending on who
they're working for and how honorable or dishonorable the intentions
of their clients)
is there somebody out there who knows the (juridical) implications of
the kind of "intellectual property" when somebody is going into the
bush and tries to patent - (and gets this patent indeed) - a very
valuable indigenous procedée before a court in the Western world
without the consent of the people who developed that procedée over
centuries? Is that different, or not, from patenting a very valuable
script without the consent of the programmer of this software? As far
as i understand that is where MS often is after.
steef van duin