On Thu, Dec 24, 2009 at 4:24 PM, Praveen A <[email protected]> wrote:
> 2009/12/24 Vickram Crishna <[email protected]>: > > The HT report says clearly that as far as they are concerned, this is > only > > applicable in the US. I think we need to file a charge at any police > station > > and raid any shop, preferably an official authorised branded shop, > selling > > the impugned software, as India is a signatory to TRIPS and should comply > > with attempts to prevent breaches of global law. > > We don't allow software to be patented in India. So there is no > violation of Indian laws here. I am sure you are right. Under what law and provision do the police, supported by the BSA, conduct raids on private premises, seize computers and file criminal charges? I have heard of this happening with both Adobe and MS users. If (as a country) we do not recognise the legal protection afforded to MS and Adobe and countless other companies in the USA, then let us consider instead mounting a newspaper campaign against accusations of 'piracy' made wrt Indian companies. Between you and me, I think the newspapers would be rather happier if we did a nice public raid against some big Indian company found to be using the illegal feature of Word. Or, say, the Indian Supreme Court. I agree that we do not want to get involved with TRIPS and traps. However, it is rather like saying that the bear does not want to get involved with the trap around his leg. My only argument here is that sometimes, one has to use the weapon nearest at hand, and what better weapon than the one annointed by the law already? > > > The 'feature' is the ability to open .xml, .docx, and .docm files. It > helps > > the application open its own files, and that is a little used feature? Do > > people who buy MS Word use it to open OpenOffice files? That might make a > > nice headline. > > So they needed a workaround, having fallen into their own 'proprietary' > > trap, and chose to suborn the global standards process in order to > achieve > > this purpose. > > As far as I heard, the patent in question just covers custom XML see > http://www.tbray.org/ongoing/When/200x/2009/12/22/On-Custom-XML > > for more on this. > > > Which document standard? Features other than the above? Analyses welcome. > > This was the killer feature Microsoft advertised when they were trying > to get ISO label for OOXML. > > -Praveen > -- > പ്രവീണ് അരിമ്പ്രത്തൊടിയില് > <GPLv2> I know my rights; I want my phone call! > <DRM> What use is a phone call, if you are unable to speak? > (as seen on /.) > Join The DRM Elimination Crew Now! > http://fci.wikia.com/wiki/Anti-DRM-Campaign > _______________________________________________ > network mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.fosscom.in/listinfo.cgi/network-fosscom.in > -- Vickram http://communicall.wordpress.com
_______________________________________________ network mailing list [email protected] http://lists.fosscom.in/listinfo.cgi/network-fosscom.in
