Ooxml is a published "spec" in the process of becoming an ISO standard. Not a microsoft patent. At least that is my understanding.
Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T -----Original Message----- From: "Andrew C. Oliver" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Tue, 08 Apr 2008 19:44:48 To:POI Developers List <[email protected]> Subject: Re: Rejection of any ENCUMBERED Microsoft Donation to POI Right but the result won't be open source. The patent holder is using a third party to implement its patent and will be free to require the end-users to purchase licenses. After the patent holder that is hiring a third party to implement its patent which it will then potentially require non-OSD compliant licensing on, then my objection will be removed. Why is this such a big issue? Ask them to sign the CLA-C and then all basis are covered and my -1 will no longer hold. -Andy Gianugo Rabellino wrote: > > On Apr 1, 2008, at 4:02 PM, Andrew C. Oliver wrote: >> So the article is wrong? Microsoft is NOT *paying* source sense to do >> this? > > That's not the point. The point is whose copyright is the software being > developed. And it is not Microsoft's, it's Sourcesense's, who then > licenses to Apache via (C)CLAs. > > Unfortunately, there are only so many times I can repeat this. > > Ciao, > -- Buni Meldware Communication Suite http://buni.org Multi-platform and extensible Email, Calendaring (including freebusy), Rich Webmail, Web-calendaring, ease of installation/administration.
