Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 13th Dec 2010 19:27 UTC, submitted by lemur2
Permalink for comment 453457
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/18/13 22:33 UTC
Linked by Anonymous on 06/18/13 22:26 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/18/13 22:25 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/18/13 17:45 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/18/13 17:32 UTC, submitted by poundsmack
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/17/13 17:58 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/17/13 17:52 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/14/13 21:03 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/14/13 20:46 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/14/13 17:32 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2006-12-26
A well versed internetaholic would realise i was aluding the fact the DMCA is often used when theres not any real encyption just a hidden set of apis.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/blog/2008/nov/28/apple-ipod
Normally supporting a nondeclared 3rd party api (namespace) without reverse engineering is fully legal. Hence j# is allowed but isnt allowed to be called java.
If this dosent change then the whole point of this news item is mute. All its saying is mono (without reverse engineering or stealing ms code) has implemented a 3rd party api without permission.
Many programs do this not just microsoft.. (wine any emulation or vm software etc)...
Google is currently being sued by oracle for implementing java libraries namespace without permission. I would suggest this will fail based on information above.
The Samba code that is designed and written to implement the protocols is not a copy of Microsoft code, nor is it based on Microoft designs.
If oracle wins.. then samba can be sued by ms unless explicit permission is granted for use if ms say their networking protocols are part of its software protection. (see apple example above.. note this hasnt been proven in court properly yet)
I didnt know that, thanks for the info. I beleive ms will NEVER sue mono as microsoft rarely sues anyone. Obviously implicit permission to use is implied when ms provided samba with the documentation so .. its extremely unlike ms would ever sue them (however perhaps potentially still within their right to if namespace patents are enforced.)
The issue you were mainly aluding to is that samba is a clean room implementation and so should be free of patent issues.. your right and i agree (so long as google wins that part of the case which it should as ms and others have previously).
Googles implementation of java is exactly the same as monos of .net only mono has semi direct permission from the owner.
This news item is just part of the pathetic media campaign to blind normal people from seeing the obvious hypocracy of the situation.
Google has issues with sun..
mono has never had any with microsoft (and has more rights to claim they have permission.)
If your worried about patent issues.. drop java/android and use .Net/mono
omg wtf ?? really?? think about it.. u know im right.