To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Once again, your troll sauce lacks spice.
Microsoft (probably accidentally) patented parts of Veritas' software that they licensed MSFT to use, and then did their typical 'we don't have to listen' dance, hoping the issue would go away. Unfortunately for whatever middle management types screwed this up, they did not realize the magnitude of their mistake in patenting key parts of Veritas' IP.
Citing this as an SCO-esque move only shows that like 95% of the /. comments I saw about this, that you have no idea what this lawsuit is about. This is a huge mistake by Microsoft, and I'm stunned they didn't make more effort to fix this problem before SYMC had to take it to court - and yes, they (Veritas) made a serious effort because of the relationship Symantic has with Microsoft. The Veritas part of the company couldn't care less about pissing off Microsoft.
>> Citing this as an SCO-esque move only shows that like 95% of the /. comments I saw about this, that you have no idea what this lawsuit is about.
Let's see... One company claims IP infringement on patents another company holds... with statements like
"These claims are unfounded because Microsoft actually purchased intellectual property rights for all relevant technologies from Veritas in 2004,"
in the mix...
It sure SOUNDS like the IBM/SCO nonsense to me... and apparantly that way to 95% of the people out there by your own admission...






Member since:
2005-07-12
It's kinda funny, when Symantec first bought out Veritas I thought it was to quash Diskeeper and fold it's code into the steaming pile that Nortons has become; just like they did with the acquisition of PowerQuest and much akin to the acquisition of Aldus by Adobe back in the late 90's... (For those of you not familiar with it, Aldus Photostyler and Pagemaker were kicking Photoshop and Pageshop's backside - so they bought out their one real competitor, rebranded Pagemaker to their own label and BURIED Photostyler)
Who'd have thought Symantec's real plan was to switch to the SCO business model. Makes sense in a way, how long can you get by on bloated software that hijacks your system worse than the malware it's supposed to prevent and makes a P4 run like a P2, ENTIRELY on a reputation that the company hasn't been worthy of since the introduction of Windows 95.