Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sun 14th Oct 2007 15:12 UTC
Legal This week's 'big' news on OSNews was about software patents. You know, those things that say you cannot stack four pixels on top of one another unless you pay money to the guy who invented four-pixel-stacks (or the guy who bought the guy who invented four-pixel-stacks). A company called IP Innovation, LLC, has sued Novell and Red Hat for infringement of the company's IP portfolio. Software patents are of course generally completely ridiculous, so I will not focus on that here. I want to focus on something else.
Thread beginning with comment 278204
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[4]: Ockham's Obsession?
by SReilly on Sun 14th Oct 2007 18:24 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Ockham's Obsession?"
SReilly
Member since:
2006-12-28

I'm sorry, but that's just nonsense. I'm just giving alternative, more logical (in my eyes) explanations for the things Groklaw found. That's all.

Nonsense? Pull the other one, it's got bells on it ;-)

Your whole article is based on the premises that the simplest explanation, i.e. yours, is naturally the most logical, ergo O.R.

Sure, you point out, and rightly so, that in most western legal systems one is innocent until proven guilty but the main gist of your article can easily be discerned as hinging on the above mentioned razor.

Besides that, it seems that I misinterpreted h3rman's comment as taking a swipe at your article. My bad!

Reply Parent Score: 3