Here's another source: http://www.informationweek.com/news/software/enterpriseapps/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=219400044 and http://adtmag.com/articles/2009/08/12/court-tells-microsoft-to-stop-selling-word-in-us.aspx
Twayne wrote: > "James Knott" <[email protected]> wrote in message > news:[email protected] > >> http://blog.seattlepi.com/microsoft/archives/176223.asp?from=blog_last3 >> > > With all due respect to the OP, and fully understanding I have no > intention of maligning him in any way, the posted info is: > > 1. From a blog: notorious sites of misinformation. > 2. Has no clarification or verification links present: only a couple > i4i wanted to see in print or documents that aren't official due to > their inability to be used as evidence in a court of law, again with no > verifiable source. > 3. It doesn't appear, from my meager abilities, to include the methods > OO.o uses. > 4. Any way you look at it, the changes needed to get around the patent > infringement, if it's real, is relatively simple to accomplish due to > its single-ness in the program. > 5. Why only Word? Other MS apps also use the XML "stuff". > 6. It would seem that anyone initiating such an action would go after > "Office" in order to close up any gaps that may allow the infringement > to slip into other applications, some of which already have it. Maybe > not the infringed part; I don't know. > > My 2 ยข anyway. Something just smells funny there. > > Twayne` > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
