"Mike Hall - MVP" <mikehall@mvps.org> wrote in message
news:ub2g8NZuJHA.1212@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...[color=blue]
> "norm" <noone@nowhere.net> wrote in message
> news:eeHnYwYuJHA.4648@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...[color=green]
>> Mike Hall - MVP wrote:[color=darkred]
>>> "norm" <noone@nowhere.net> wrote in message
>>> news:u8mu7cYuJHA.4488@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>>>> Mike Hall - MVP wrote:
>>>>> "The poster formerly known as 'The Poster Formerly Known as Nina
>>>>> DiBoy'" <me211@privacy.net> wrote in message
>>>>> news:grm84p$tgk$1@aioe.org...
>>>>>> Alias wrote:
>>>>>>> [url]http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=9131339[/url]
>>>>>>> Now ain't that nice, MS gets fined for stealing WPA. The irony! MS
>>>>>>> gets conviction of stealing the program they use to make sure no one
>>>>>>> steals from them!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Alias
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Oh, that is priceless! Thanks for sharing. :)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> "Software is like sex, it's better when it's free."
>>>>>> - Linus Torvalds
>>>>>>
>>>>>> DRM and unintended consequences:
>>>>>> [url]http://blogs.techrepublic.com.com/security/?p=435&tag=nl.e101[/url]
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Its states an infringement of a patent, not theft directly. Either
>>>>> way, it has cost MS dear..
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> Maybe I misunderstand, but if infringing on a patent is not theft, then
>>>> how is not adhering to a eula theft? How many times have people in this
>>>> ng been called thieves because they are outside of the parameters of a
>>>> eula?
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> norm
>>>
>>>
>>> We are not party to how the patent was infringed, that is to say that
>>> there was no reference to MS knowingly using Uniloc's code. There are,
>>> however, two things which we do know.
>>>
>>> 1. The jurors do not like Microsoft
>>> 2. The directors of Uniloc will be able to pay themselves a nice bonus
>>> should they feel the need.. :-)
>>>
>>>[/color]
>> But why is one issue not considered "theft" and the other is? It is not a
>> question of who likes whom or of bonuses. Is not being in compliance with
>> a eula theft or not?
>>
>> --
>> norm[/color]
>
>
> Norm
>
> You are assuming that Microsoft looked at anything Uniloc, and thought 'to
> hell with it, we will do what we like'
>
> There may be some substance in the above, but we do not know for sure, so
> it is wrong to make the assumption that MS deliberately set out to 'steal'
> the idea..[/color]

Did Balmer overtly say steal the code? Probably not.

Did the culture of coding routinely overlook plagerism for profit and
advancement, you bet your curliers they did.

Pretty obvious you have never worked in a large code shop/project if you
cannot acknowledge this fact of reality.

The permission was implied by culture. I wouldn't even doubt the people who
checked in the designs and code are still working for them, probably even
promoted! And are other projects they worked on being inspected for other
issues, no sir.... management wants this under the rug.

1/2, if not more of the "guru" types, if they can't steal code they steal
ideas. Very few developers actually write good code and ideas all by
themselves.