"We can read the Linspire-Microsoft patent agreement now, or more precisely Microsoft's 'Covenant to Customers', and I thought it would be worthwhile to give it a close, line-by-line reading. I'll explain it as best I can, but ask your lawyer if it matters to you in a real-world sense. For our purposes here, let's just have fun with the worst deal I've seen yet in this category."
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2005-07-02
As people have already said, PJ has never tried to hide her bias. Knowing this, it's relatively easy to filter it out and just get the facts.
So, basically, you didn't have anything to say about the substance of what she wrote, but you still took time to complain about the style it was written in...again, that seems to me as if you're trying to change the subject and draw attention away from the fact that Linspire got *shafted* by MS with this deal.
I disagree. I find that it actually makes it more interesting to read than the average legal analysis, while being just as informative. I think your bias is simply preventing you from filtering out the commentary part...
Member since:2005-07-06
I think your bias is preventing you from seeing that the open source community doesn't seem to give a rats ass how they get their messages across. Sarcasm, FUD (yes, FUD), hate, deception. It's all fair game as long as it knocks Microsoft or other things propietary. I wish the community wouldn't have to sink to that level. A level that corporations love to sink to themselves. But I guess it's ok since it's against Microsoft.
Anything that doesn't put Microsoft in a remotely positive light (not that they deserve that in this case) is used, regardless of how tasteless.
Anyway, go ahead and mod this down. It's getting too off-topic and people don't like to hear the truth anyway.
Member since:
2005-07-06
Where did I say she got anything wrong? It was too much of a pain to sort through anything of value with all the sarcasm.
This has nothing to do with my supposed "agenda". I'd be annoyed if it were the other way around and someone was posting a piece critical of say, the GPL3, but was making a snarky/sarcastic remark every other sentence. It devalues the message greatly and turns me off from taking them seriously. It exposes their agenda for everyone to see. They actually have an agenda.
Edited 2007-07-23 15:51