FreeTDS Development Group

[Bob Hetzel <beh AT case.edu>]

1) Part of that shareholder value they're protection is derived from 
patenting stuff before some other nit wit patents it and then sues.  I 
believe this has happened in at least one case in the last few years 
where somebody got a rather vague patent for something already commonly 
used and managed to win a lawsuit over it.  Even if MS won said lawsuit 
it will cost more than several lame patents would have cost.  If they 
lose, it can easily cost an amount equivalent to hundreds of them.

2) For corporate and individual ego/bragging in advertising/etc. Big 
companies routinely patent stuff to say that they're the great 
innovators as well as for employees to pad their resume.  Staff 
sometimes even get cash rewards for coming up with stuff that winds up 
being patented in their employer's name.

However, given past Microsoft practices, I share other's concern.  In 
one of their defenses about antitrust issues of bundling their browser 
and OS together, they were found to have even doctored a presentation 
video they used in court to try to prove their point, but that was a 
while back (perhaps 10 years or so).

   Bob

John Saylor wrote:
> hey
>
> if past practices are anything to go by, microsoft is only insterested
> in adding shareholder value.
>
> period. 
>
> i don't know what the plan is here. i share your viewpoint [wtf?], but
> i'm sure there are some people in redmond who have some kinda ROI memo
> on this action.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: freetds-bounces AT lists.ibiblio.org
> [mailto:freetds-bounces AT lists.ibiblio.org] On Behalf Of James K. Lowden
>
> Why go to all the work and bluster to get a patent just
> to preclude the possibility of a commercial competitor copying your
> 25-year old technology?  Isn't there anything more important to do?  
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> FreeTDS mailing list
> FreeTDS AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/freetds