[News] Here Comes the OOXML 'Patent Tax' (Already!), OpenOffice.org Shielded - Linux

This is a discussion on [News] Here Comes the OOXML 'Patent Tax' (Already!), OpenOffice.org Shielded - Linux ; Microsoft releases updated Office-OpenOffice XML translator, ramps up document interop efforts as ISO mulls OpenXML ,----[ Quote ] | Microsoft today launched an update of its OpenXML and ODF translator for its | Excel and Powerpoint applications and pledged to ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 11 of 11

Thread: [News] Here Comes the OOXML 'Patent Tax' (Already!), OpenOffice.org Shielded

  1. [News] Here Comes the OOXML 'Patent Tax' (Already!), OpenOffice.org Shielded

    Microsoft releases updated Office-OpenOffice XML translator, ramps up document
    interop efforts as ISO mulls OpenXML

    ,----[ Quote ]
    | Microsoft today launched an update of its OpenXML and ODF translator for its
    | Excel and Powerpoint applications and pledged to keep churning out more
    | documentation to enable interoperability — and more patents to protect that
    | IP.
    |
    | [...]
    |
    | Microsoft would not disclose pricing for its protocol licensing but pledged
    | today that going forward it will be offered at a “reasonable and non
    | discriminatory” (RAND) manner. Late last month — just days after Microsoft
    | launched its multi-faceted interoperability initiative –the European Union
    | fined Microsoft $1.4 billion for allegedly failing to comply with a
    | three-year-old order to supply server interoperability data for competitors.
    | Some rivals, including Samba and other open source players, argued in the
    | past that that the costs were too prohibitive for ISVs.
    `----

    http://blogs.zdnet.com/open-source/?p=2094

    Interoperability by PR Is a Gambit

    ,----[ Quote ]
    | Microsoft's idea of a Document Interoperability Initiative is to put together
    | a bunch of businesses that profit from file format incompatibilities. And
    | that is supposed to demonstrate—quoting from the press release—"Microsoft's
    | commitment to implement a set of strategic changes in its technology and
    | business practices to expand interoperability through the implementation of
    | its interoperability principles."
    `----

    http://www.microsoft-watch.com/conte...129TX1K0000535
    http://tinyurl.com/3yoot6

    OpenOffice in a more open world

    ,----[ Quote ]
    | OpenOffice.org has announced that the project will be moving from its current
    | LGPLv2 licensing to the LGPLv3 with a coming version 3.0 of the open source
    | office software suite.
    |
    | [...]
    |
    | Interestingly, OpenOffice.org’s announcement comes on the same day Microsot
    | has made another interoperability announcement, this time centered on
    | document formats.
    `----

    http://blogs.the451group.com/opensou...re-open-world/

    Simon Phipps was right

    ,----[ Quote ]
    | I believed that no matter what the process, a standard should be judged by
    | the product. Watching the fallout settle from the BRM in Geneva, I'm
    | beginning to think that you were right and I was wrong.
    |
    | What you got right is that when a process is allowed to go out of its way to
    | exclude legitimate participation, we must withdraw from the presumption that
    | the standard can be legitimate, even if the end product does not overly
    | exclude the possibility of an open source implementation. This is what I have
    | leared by reading the Groklaw report on the BRM
    `----

    http://opensource.org/node/269

    Good to have GPLv3 after all. Microsoft also deceived/lied about patents in
    OOXML. Busted. Wasn't /that/ predictable?


    Related:

    Developer’s Beware: OOXML – IPR: Minding the Gaps and Why They Matter

    ,----[ Quote ]
    | Microsoft has a patent promise, the Open Specification Promise (OSP) and a
    | Covenant Not to Sue, relating to OOXML. If you want to implement OOXML with
    | confidence that you are not infringing on any intellectual property rights
    | (IPR), these coverages are not adequate. They have gaps. *
    `----

    http://www.odfalliance.org/resources/IssueBriefIPR.pdf


    IP Issues with OOXML (DIS 29500)

    ,----[ Quote ]
    | Out of all the free and open source licences which are available, there are
    | two which are disproportionately chosen by FOSS developers when licensing
    | their software. Those two are the GPL and the LGPL. Of these, the GPL is
    | disproportionately favoured over the LGPL.* If there are issues with GPL
    | implementations then there are IP issues with OOXML. Any assurance that
    | excludes implementation under these licences is just cause for the FOSS
    | community to voice concern. * * *
    |
    | [...]
    |
    | If there are issues with GPL implementations then there are IP issues with
    | OOXML. Microsoft implicitly concedes there are issues with GPL
    | implementations. *
    `----

    http://brendanscott.wordpress.com/20...xml-dis-29500/


    By Metes and Bounds

    ,----[ Quote ]
    | But you might say, "Please Rob, you can't be serious. Who would try to get a
    | patent on laying out a footnote? That just doesn't happen in the real world."
    |
    | But consider for Microsoft's patent application "Method and computer readable
    | medium for laying out footnotes" (US20060156225A1). I'm not saying that
    | application matches the above feature in the standard, but if it did, is
    | there anyone who will argue that the Open Specification Promise would not
    | apply in this case? * *
    `----

    http://www.robweir.com/blog/2008/02/...nd-bounds.html


    Defensive Patents, Other Fairy Tales

    ,----[ Quote ]
    | "Defensive patents" make as much sense as leaving a loaded gun around the
    | house. Like a home robbery, it is more likely it will be used against the
    | home owner then the intruder. *
    `----

    http://krow.livejournal.com/578868.html


    Microsoft patents by Brian Jones

    ,----[ Quote ]
    | For fun we just did a quick search of published US patent applications
    | with "Brian Jones" as an author, and "Microsoft" as the assignee.
    |
    | [...]
    |
    | Some of these, like the packing ones, seem to apply directly to OOXML. What
    | isn't clear to us is why Microsoft would pursue patent protection for patents
    | rights that their are promising that they won't assert over users of OOXML. *
    `----

    http://www.noooxml.org/forum/t-35323...by-brian-jones


    Wishful Spinning

    ,----[ Quote ]
    | OOXML gets adopted. More and more projects are started. Let's see which of
    | these would survive without funding. Meanwhile a spin factory sends out
    | success stories that most bloggers find worthless to discuss. It is possible
    | to get the Krauts on board that are supposed to review OOXML but would OOXML
    | survive a review by the crowds? * *
    `----

    http://www.noooxml.org/forum/t-35292/wishful-spinning


    Digging in the Comments: Patents

    ,----[ Quote ]
    | Patent licensing is probably the most important aspect for all third parties
    | that want to implement or use the Open XML specification. Unfortunately the
    | Ballot Resolution Meeting cannot discuss these aspects because only technical
    | and editorial issues would get resolved. *
    |
    | [...]
    |
    | When you have a patent which covers Open XML and you refuse to license it,
    | the standard process gets stalled. Large companies in the standardization
    | process are reluctant to use that nuke option. Given the ambush that the
    | software patent practice means today it is quite possible that Open XML
    | infringes a patent and all parties eventually have an obligation to license
    | it. * *
    `----

    http://www.noooxml.org/forum/t-31491...mments:patents


    Patent threat looms large over OOXML

    ,----[ Quote ]
    | "If OOXML goes through as an ISO standard, the IT industry, government and
    | business will encumbered with a 6000-page specification peppered with
    | potential patent liabilities" said NZOSS President Don Christie. *
    |
    | "Patent threats have already been used to spread doubt amongst organisations
    | keen to take advantage of the benefits of open source. No one knows whether
    | such claims have any merit, but it is calculated to deter the development and
    | use of open and alternative toolsets." *
    `----

    http://nzoss.org.nz/node/179


    Cyberlaw OOXML Seminar 14 December

    ,----[ Quote ]
    | However, this raises the issue - what assurance does a developer have that
    | such a large specification is not the subject of third party patent claims? *
    | * * * ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    | The pedigree of the specification is certainly no reason for hope, Microsoft
    | has been the target of third party patent claims for some time now including
    | some high profile losses in patent suits. The fact that the specification has
    | been developed behind closed doors and on a fast track means that there has
    | been no adequate opportunity to evaluate the likelihood of third party patent
    | claims against the specifications. The sheer size of the document suggests
    | there will be at least a couple hiding in there somewhere. * * *
    `----

    http://brendanscott.wordpress.com/20...r-14-december/


    ISO warned about possible patent violations of DIS29500 (aka OOXML)

    ,----[ Quote ]
    | I have just send the following email to ISO members (you can find some of
    | their email addresses on the INCTIS website) to warn them about the possible *
    | patent ambush...
    `----

    http://jeremywang67.blogspot.com/200...le-patent.html


    Interoperability the ELIZA way

    ,----[ Quote ]
    | * So, now I have an Ecma standard, but ISO doesn't like it
    | > Come, come, elucidate your thoughts.
    | *The open source zealots don't respect our standards
    | > I'm not sure I understand you fully.
    | * They are thieving communists who don't respect intellectual property
    | > What do you think?
    | * I think we should outlaw open source
    | > Do you really think so?
    | * Yes, otherwise there will be no more innovation
    | > Why no?
    | * Because without profit there is no incentive to innovate
    | > Why no?
    | * Without profit, no one would work
    | > Why no?
    | * What are you, some sort of communist?
    | > Would you prefer if I were not some sort of communist?
    | * Yes, better dead than red
    | > I understand.
    | * OK. So we need an ISO so we can continue innovation
    | > Come, come, elucidate your thoughts.
    | * An ISO allows us to sell the same old MS Office we always had with our
    | monopolist's profit margin. That is how we ensure innovation.
    | > What do you think?
    | * I have a monopoly.
    | > You have a monopoly?
    | * Yes, otherwise we would not be able to claim innovation by having an ISO
    | format that merely mimics a 10-year old legacy format.
    | > I see.
    |
    | [...]
    |
    | So, if anyone shows you interoperability, ask yourself whether both sides of
    | the interaction actually fully understand the data that is being exchanged.
    | If not, this is not really full interoperability. It is just an illusion.
    `----

    http://www.robweir.com/blog/2008/01/...eliza-way.html

  2. Re: [News] Here Comes the OOXML 'Patent Tax' (Already!), OpenOffice.orgShielded

    Roy Schestowitz wrote:

    > Microsoft releases updated Office-OpenOffice XML translator, ramps up
    > document interop efforts as ISO mulls OpenXML
    >
    > ,----[ Quote ]
    > | Microsoft today launched an update of its OpenXML and ODF
    > | translator for its Excel and Powerpoint applications and pledged to
    > | keep churning out more documentation to enable interoperability —
    > | and more patents to protect that IP.


    Isn't that an oxymoron?

    > | [...]
    > |
    > | Microsoft would not disclose pricing for its protocol licensing but
    > | pledged today that going forward it will be offered at a
    > | “reasonable and non discriminatory” (RAND) manner.


    Wait... I'm confused. Are they saying we need to /pay/ to use their
    "open" standard?

    --
    K.
    http://slated.org

    ..----
    | 'When it comes to knowledge, "ownership" just doesn't make sense'
    | ~ Cory Doctorow, The Guardian. http://tinyurl.com/22bgx8
    `----

    Fedora release 8 (Werewolf) on sky, running kernel 2.6.23.8-63.fc8
    02:42:33 up 78 days, 18 min, 5 users, load average: 0.03, 0.06, 0.18

  3. Re: [News] Here Comes the OOXML 'Patent Tax' (Already!), OpenOffice.org Shielded

    ____/ [H]omer on Saturday 08 March 2008 02:42 : \____

    > Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    >
    >> Microsoft releases updated Office-OpenOffice XML translator, ramps up
    >> document interop efforts as ISO mulls OpenXML
    >>
    >> ,----[ Quote ]
    >> | Microsoft today launched an update of its OpenXML and ODF
    >> | translator for its Excel and Powerpoint applications and pledged to
    >> | keep churning out more documentation to enable interoperability —
    >> | and more patents to protect that IP.

    >
    > Isn't that an oxymoron?
    >
    >> | [...]
    >> |
    >> | Microsoft would not disclose pricing for its protocol licensing but
    >> | pledged today that going forward it will be offered at a
    >> | “reasonable and non discriminatory” (RAND) manner.

    >
    > Wait... I'm confused. Are they saying we need to /pay/ to use their
    > "open" standard?


    It's neither open nor a standard. It's the same old BS from Redmond, which is
    running low in terms of cash. It needs to start mooching off someone else.

    --
    ~~ Best of wishes

    Beware the Windows box spewage (more commonly known as "spam")
    http://Schestowitz.com | RHAT Linux | PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
    03:20:03 up 43 days, 13:14, 3 users, load average: 1.84, 1.33, 1.64
    http://iuron.com - Open Source knowledge engine project

  4. Re: [News] Here Comes the OOXML 'Patent Tax' (Already!), OpenOffice.org Shielded

    On Sat, 08 Mar 2008 03:21:16 +0000, Roy Schestowitz wrote:


    > It's neither open nor a standard. It's the same old BS from Redmond, which is
    > running low in terms of cash. It needs to start mooching off someone else.


    Your proof is?

    --
    Moshe Goldfarb
    Collector of soaps from around the globe.
    Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
    http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/

  5. Re: [News] Here Comes the OOXML 'Patent Tax' (Already!), OpenOffice.org Shielded

    "[H]omer" wrote in news:92b9a5-rj4.ln1@sky.matrix:

    > Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    >
    >> Microsoft releases updated Office-OpenOffice XML translator, ramps up
    >> document interop efforts as ISO mulls OpenXML
    >>
    >> ,----[ Quote ]
    >> | Microsoft today launched an update of its OpenXML and ODF
    >> | translator for its Excel and Powerpoint applications and pledged to
    >> | keep churning out more documentation to enable interoperability —
    >> | and more patents to protect that IP.

    >
    > Isn't that an oxymoron?
    >
    >> | [...]
    >> |
    >> | Microsoft would not disclose pricing for its protocol licensing but
    >> | pledged today that going forward it will be offered at a
    >> | “reasonable and non discriminatory” (RAND) manner.

    >
    > Wait... I'm confused. Are they saying we need to /pay/ to use their
    > "open" standard?


    No - they are talking about their release of the documentation of e.g.
    internal Microsoft Office APIs and a long list of the protocols connecting
    their vertical hub (SharePoint, Exchange Server etc).

    --
    Jesper Lund Stocholm
    http://idippedut.dk

  6. Re: [News] Here Comes the OOXML 'Patent Tax' (Already!), OpenOffice.org Shielded

    * [H]omer peremptorily fired off this memo:

    >> | Microsoft would not disclose pricing for its protocol licensing but
    >> | pledged today that going forward it will be offered at a
    >> | ?reasonable and non discriminatory? (RAND) manner.

    >
    > Wait... I'm confused. Are they saying we need to /pay/ to use their
    > "open" standard?


    That's Microsoft's plan. Slow down open source in the commercial sector
    by making it cost more.

    Actually, it is reasonable, from a business point of view. The trouble
    for Microsoft is two-fold:

    1. Patents are murky until clarified in court.
    2. Other big entities have similar patents.

    --
    Success is a lousy teacher. It seduces smart people into thinking they can't
    lose.
    -- Bill Gates

  7. Re: [News] Here Comes the OOXML 'Patent Tax' (Already!), OpenOffice.org Shielded

    In article <92b9a5-rj4.ln1@sky.matrix>, "[H]omer" wrote:
    >
    > Wait... I'm confused. Are they saying we need to /pay/ to use their
    > "open" standard?


    No. Schestowitz (as usual) edited the quotes in such a way, and
    combined articles in such a way as to make it look like the articles
    said something that they didn't.

    Here he combined both techniques. He added "related" articles that
    aren't talking about the same thing, and he cut out sections of quotes
    to bring things together so, so that a section of the article of the
    form:

    Paragraph about X

    Paragraph about Y

    Another paragraph about Y

    is quoted as

    Paragraph about X

    ...cut...

    Another paragraph about Y

    The reader who does not click the link and read the article is left with
    the impression that "Another paragraph about Y" is actually "Another
    paragraph about X".

    --
    --Tim Smith

  8. Re: [News] Here Comes the OOXML 'Patent Tax' (Already!), OpenOffice.org Shielded

    On Sat, 08 Mar 2008 08:03:32 -0800, Tim Smith wrote:

    > In article <92b9a5-rj4.ln1@sky.matrix>, "[H]omer" wrote:
    >>
    >> Wait... I'm confused. Are they saying we need to /pay/ to use their
    >> "open" standard?

    >
    > No. Schestowitz (as usual) edited the quotes in such a way, and
    > combined articles in such a way as to make it look like the articles
    > said something that they didn't.
    >
    > Here he combined both techniques. He added "related" articles that
    > aren't talking about the same thing, and he cut out sections of quotes
    > to bring things together so, so that a section of the article of the
    > form:
    >
    > Paragraph about X
    >
    > Paragraph about Y
    >
    > Another paragraph about Y
    >
    > is quoted as
    >
    > Paragraph about X
    >
    > ...cut...
    >
    > Another paragraph about Y
    >
    > The reader who does not click the link and read the article is left with
    > the impression that "Another paragraph about Y" is actually "Another
    > paragraph about X".


    It appears that Schestowitz has altered his posting style again.
    I think he is making subtle changes to his SPAM-O-Matic script.
    Notice too that the line count has gone up substantially.

    It's now up in the 300 range for many of his posts.

    There is no way he is typing in this stuff manually.
    No way.


    --
    Moshe Goldfarb
    Collector of soaps from around the globe.
    Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
    http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/

  9. Re: [News] Here Comes the OOXML 'Patent Tax' (Already!), OpenOffice.org Shielded

    ____/ Linonut on Saturday 08 March 2008 15:46 : \____

    > * [H]omer peremptorily fired off this memo:
    >
    >>> | Microsoft would not disclose pricing for its protocol licensing but
    >>> | pledged today that going forward it will be offered at a
    >>> | ?reasonable and non discriminatory? (RAND) manner.

    >>
    >> Wait... I'm confused. Are they saying we need to /pay/ to use their
    >> "open" standard?

    >
    > That's Microsoft's plan. Slow down open source in the commercial sector
    > by making it cost more.
    >
    > Actually, it is reasonable, from a business point of view. The trouble
    > for Microsoft is two-fold:
    >
    > 1. Patents are murky until clarified in court.
    > 2. Other big entities have similar patents.


    It will lead Microsoft to more fines (wrath of the EU). I notice that a
    Microsoft partner joined this thread to defend Microsoft, so we must be on the
    right topic.

    --
    ~~ Best of wishes

    Roy S. Schestowitz | Vista: as the reputation of "Longhorn" was mucked
    http://Schestowitz.com | Free as in Free Beer | PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
    Cpu(s): 25.9%us, 4.0%sy, 1.0%ni, 64.6%id, 4.2%wa, 0.3%hi, 0.1%si, 0.0%st
    http://iuron.com - semantic engine to gather information


  10. Re: [News] Here Comes the OOXML 'Patent Tax' (Already!), OpenOffice.org Shielded

    Jesper Lund Stocholm espoused:
    > "[H]omer" wrote in news:92b9a5-rj4.ln1@sky.matrix:
    >
    >> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    >>
    >>> Microsoft releases updated Office-OpenOffice XML translator, ramps up
    >>> document interop efforts as ISO mulls OpenXML
    >>>
    >>> ,----[ Quote ]
    >>> | Microsoft today launched an update of its OpenXML and ODF
    >>> | translator for its Excel and Powerpoint applications and pledged to
    >>> | keep churning out more documentation to enable interoperability —
    >>> | and more patents to protect that IP.

    >>
    >> Isn't that an oxymoron?
    >>
    >>> | [...]
    >>> |
    >>> | Microsoft would not disclose pricing for its protocol licensing but
    >>> | pledged today that going forward it will be offered at a
    >>> | “reasonable and non discriminatory” (RAND) manner.

    >>
    >> Wait... I'm confused. Are they saying we need to /pay/ to use their
    >> "open" standard?

    >
    > No - they are talking about their release of the documentation of e.g.
    > internal Microsoft Office APIs and a long list of the protocols connecting
    > their vertical hub (SharePoint, Exchange Server etc).
    >


    So you have to pay for documentation in order to use a proprietary
    interface. Of course, it won't be standard in any way, indeed, if it
    were, there would be no need to pay for the documentation, therefore,
    anyone using this is just asking for the spec to be changed in order to
    have to buy the documentation again. It's lock-in by another route.

    --
    | Mark Kent -- mark at ellandroad dot demon dot co dot uk |
    | Cola faq: http://www.faqs.org/faqs/linux/advocacy/faq-and-primer/ |
    | Cola trolls: http://colatrolls.blogspot.com/ |
    | My (new) blog: http://www.thereisnomagic.org |

+ Reply to Thread