On Tue, Jan 08, 2008 at 11:52:47AM +0000, Alex Hudson wrote:
On Tue, 2008-01-08 at 11:48 +0000, Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote:
On Tue, Jan 08, 2008 at 12:05:21PM +0100, Reinhard Mueller wrote:
Am Dienstag, den 08.01.2008, 00:06 +0000 schrieb Rui Miguel Silva Seabra:
MS was forced to tell what it claimed to be patents instead of FUDing "We have xxx patents on this".
Oh really? Can you point me to the lists?
http://samba.org/samba/PFIF/PFIF_agreement.pdf Page 46 to 55
Wrong, those are "third parties".
It seems you're looking at the wrong page(s).
Page 45 lists claims from third parties Microsoft has been notified by.
Pages 46 through 55 list Microsoft owned/controlled patents in the US and EU, and patent applications.
I repeated my "procedure" and noticed that in my pagedown after page 45 "Appendix iv" got hidden just above the upper limit of the window, so I thought they where a listing.
Hope that helps,
Now it makes sense. Still: => recognising validity of Microsoft's software patents. => foot, meet bullet
Rui