Microsoft may not sell MS Word

[rpm]

MS to appeal ruling that it may not sell Word

Microsoft said Wednesday it plans to appeal a ruling by a Texas judge that would ban the US software giant from selling its popular Word program in the United States.

 

[kgatlem]

Crooks....

 

[rehd]

Seems like this isnt their (Microsoft) first or last time....They would probably appeal for as long as possible...

 

[Balstrome]

Out of the 40 000 features of ms words, I think I have used less than 1000... Most of which notepad and wordpad support already.

 

[apogeeza]

OpenOffice.org rules!!!

Seriously, I wonder how this affects OOXML and ODF. Since OOXML is only a ... ahem, "standard" because of it's handling of xml (and the payouts to the ISO judges, but that's another story) so If any one heard anything on that front, please drop a line.

 

[Lazy]

I can't see Microsoft not fighting this.

 

[lpvoid]

WHAT?! This is bizzare.

I use OO anyways, but this is just crazy.

 

[Tassidar]

WHAT?! This is bizzare.

I use OO anyways, but this is just crazy.

It is, and those who are saying MS should suffer, should consider that a similar fate could face other companies if this gets upheld.

 

[Tassidar]

It sounds like a joke. But, it's real and it's anything but a joke for Microsoft. Judge Leonard Davis, of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, has issued an injunction (PDF Link) that "prohibits Microsoft from selling or importing to the United States any Microsoft Word products that have the capability of opening .XML, .DOCX or DOCM files (XML files) containing custom XML."

Microsoft had been sued by i4i, a collaborative content solution and technology company. Its founder, Michel Vulpe, owned a patent covering a way of reading XML (Extended Markup Language) documents. XML is the basis of Microsoft's controversial Open XML document formats. The U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas is infamous for supporting patent lawsuits and fast-tracking them. In intellectual property law circles, this Court has become known as "A Haven for Patent Pirates."

http://blogs.computerworld.com/14532/microsoft_banned_from_selling_word

 

[killadoob]

See this is why i pirate microsoft goods, because are also crooks

 

[Tassidar]

See this is why i pirate microsoft goods, because are also crooks

Ever heard that thing about two wrongs and a right?

 

[icyrus]

Patents should be abolished, especially for software but I can't help but crack a smile about this after Microsoft's long and continued support of software patents.

 

[Fuzzbox]

MS will probably buy the company and then shut it down. Probably cheaper than settling lawsuit and the lawsuit could take a few more years anyway

 

[Ou grote]

Patents should be abolished, especially for software but I can't help but crack a smile about this after Microsoft's long and continued support of software patents.

Yes, innovation has never helped anyone.

 

[icyrus]

Yes, innovation has never helped anyone.

Bollocks. Please explain how this patent is fostering innovation.

 

[PeterCH]

Ever heard that thing about two wrongs and a right?

Well the bombing of Hiroshima stopped WW2, talk about two wrongs and a right at the end of it = end of WW2.

 

[Ou grote]

Bollocks. Please explain how this patent is fostering innovation.

"Patents should be abolished, especially for software "
Your words...

 

[icyrus]

"Patents should be abolished, especially for software "
Your words...

Yes and I stand by them. What is your point? Do you even have one?

 

[Ou grote]

Yes and I stand by them. What is your point? Do you even have one?

Get yourself a job.
Tell your boss you do not wish to be paid.

You'll get the point at some stage.

 

[porchrat]

Bollocks. Please explain how this patent is fostering innovation.

While I agree that this particular patent seems to be quite generic, and prior art lurks around every corner, to say that all patents should be abolished is an extreme stance.

Not allowing someone to protect their intellectual property (in fact arguing that intellectual property doesn't exist, which seems to be your argument) would most definitely stifle innovation. If you can't see that then it isn't even worth trying to explain it to you.