|
Authored by: nsomos on Tuesday, June 12 2012 @ 10:03 PM EDT |
Please post any needed correction here.
We try to be faithful to the court records, so if there
appears to be any error in transcript, please check
against the PDFs before suggesting a correction.
Thnx -> Thanks[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: feldegast on Tuesday, June 12 2012 @ 11:38 PM EDT |
Please make links clickable
---
IANAL
My posts are ©2004-2012 and released under the Creative Commons License
Attribution-Noncommercial 2.0
P.J. has permission for commercial use.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: feldegast on Tuesday, June 12 2012 @ 11:39 PM EDT |
Please make links clickable
---
IANAL
My posts are ©2004-2012 and released under the Creative Commons License
Attribution-Noncommercial 2.0
P.J. has permission for commercial use.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- Perhaps there is hope after all - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, June 13 2012 @ 12:05 AM EDT
- New Scientist: The man who gave Linux to the world - Authored by: macrorodent on Wednesday, June 13 2012 @ 01:14 AM EDT
- Linus Torvalds: Linux succeeded thanks to selfishness and trust - Authored by: eamacnaghten on Wednesday, June 13 2012 @ 04:11 AM EDT
- Software Patent Discussion Thread n/t - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, June 13 2012 @ 08:27 AM EDT
- Kirtsaeng v. John Wiley & Sons - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, June 13 2012 @ 08:54 AM EDT
- Why Privacy Matters Even if You Have 'Nothing to Hide' - Thanks PJ for letting us post as Anon's - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, June 13 2012 @ 10:45 AM EDT
- Linus Torvalds shares Millennium Technology Prize - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, June 13 2012 @ 10:56 AM EDT
- lattice vibrations = draw 30 picowatts of power and produce 69 picowatts of light - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, June 13 2012 @ 11:39 AM EDT
- MacBook Pro means being literaly locked out of your own computer - Authored by: Gringo_ on Wednesday, June 13 2012 @ 12:57 PM EDT
- Microsoft Education© - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, June 13 2012 @ 02:44 PM EDT
- Android: not-so-open open source - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, June 13 2012 @ 02:45 PM EDT
- How Microsoft and Yahoo are selling politicians access to you - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, June 13 2012 @ 05:34 PM EDT
- Lawmakers Weigh in on Microsoft v. Motorola Fight at ITC - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, June 13 2012 @ 05:36 PM EDT
- Speech app removed from App[le] Store over patent dispute - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, June 13 2012 @ 06:07 PM EDT
- The silence of Maya - Authored by: MadTom1999 on Thursday, June 14 2012 @ 02:39 AM EDT
- No Fishing in Texas - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, June 14 2012 @ 02:50 AM EDT
- Cryptic Message - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, June 14 2012 @ 03:44 AM EDT
- Nokia to cut 10,000 jobs - Authored by: say_what on Thursday, June 14 2012 @ 08:27 AM EDT
- More Nokia Disinformation - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, June 14 2012 @ 12:18 PM EDT
- "Statistics can help in all walks of life." - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, June 14 2012 @ 07:01 PM EDT
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 12 2012 @ 11:39 PM EDT |
I can relate to this article. I work for RIT and am the advisor for SPARSA
(sparsa.org), one of the oldest and longest running student led security groups
at any university. When we first organized, we didn't even have a security
program. There is a lot of angst at the university about teaching
"hacking". In fact, we have a contest call the "Information
Security Talent Show" and were forbidden from using the word hacking in the
title. Part of the problem is the fear of liability. There is also, for some
reason, a real disdain for anyone doing "hacking" that seems to come
from the industry. Its funny because many of the hackers who made names for
themselves now work for companies who advertise "We Don't Hire
Hackers!". Unfortunately the faculty are largely in denial about the set
of skills our students need when they leave here. Many have graduated without a
solid understanding of basic tools like nmap or wireshark. Things are getting
better, but change is slow. The university has recently pledged to make
security a higher priority program. Hopefully it will develop beyond its
current form.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: feldegast on Tuesday, June 12 2012 @ 11:41 PM EDT |
Please post transcribed text/html here (in plain text)
Thank you for your support
---
IANAL
My posts are ©2004-2012 and released under the Creative Commons License
Attribution-Noncommercial 2.0
P.J. has permission for commercial use.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, June 13 2012 @ 12:39 AM EDT |
That's one possible explanation of his severe and debilitating memory
problems... I mean, seriously, not remembering his own ruling?!?
I suppose
that there could be other organic brain problems that might
explain it, too,
which would be quite sad to see. These kinds of problems do
tend to crop up
with age, and should be addressed quickly by the Federal
Courts, lest the
people lose confidence in their judges' abilities to render
justice.
Other
options do exist to explain this erratic behavior... uglier ones that
involve
choice and baser human nature. I, for one, hope it's one of the former
possibilities. I also hope that it gets addressed, regardless of the cause. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: rsteinmetz70112 on Wednesday, June 13 2012 @ 01:41 PM EDT |
The focus of this trial has always puzzled me, because it is tied to the O/S
market and the idea of middleware, not about Microsoft trying to leverage and
extend their monopoly into applications.
Isn't that also illegal?
---
Rsteinmetz - IANAL therefore my opinions are illegal.
"I could be wrong now, but I don't think so."
Randy Newman - The Title Theme from Monk
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, June 13 2012 @ 03:51 PM EDT |
I quoted large chunks so you will understand why I'm so puzzled that
he's waking up nights wondering what the case is about, and if he is, why
doesn't he go back and reread his own opinion?
Yes, it seems
strange. Just trying to think of what excuses there might be...
He is on the
road, operating out of a temporary office. Some people don't do that well. He
seemed very confused about what resources he had available to him. That's not
much of an excuse since it was his decision to do that.
He didn't seem to
realize that he was misremembering things and didn't know what it was that he
didn't know. The previous week he seemed to be insisting that he understood
Novell's theory. What he thought he didn't understand then is how Novell was
going to offer any evidence to support it (the wrong theory). Going back to read
what he wrote earlier might not have occurred to him, because he originally
decided that the suit wasn't timely and Novell lacked standing to sue. That
didn't bear on what he thought the problem was this time.
What's really
worrying is how he didn't seem to give Novell's lawyers time to walk him through
things. It seems like he should have run long or stopped testimony 1/2 hour
early if necessary to allow for that.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Ian Al on Thursday, June 14 2012 @ 05:02 AM EDT |
MR. JOHNSON: That was deception. That was anticompetitive. That was
-- and had they, had they, Your Honor, simply denied the extensible shell to all
ISVs, that would have been wrong according to Microsoft's own executives with
respect to this point, but it might have fallen within what you said, the lack
of duty of a monopolist.
Novell are doing a poor job explaining
their case. They keep raising the key points, but don't explain why they are
key, to the judge.
As Mr. Johnson says, keeping the NameSpace extension
APIs from competitors and using them for Microsoft Office is anti-competitive
for applications running on Windows. However, that has been dealt with in
another case. Mr. Johnson needs to explain why the deception is only partly to
do with application competition and partly to do with middleware.
Novell did
not need the NameSpace extensions because they were able to use alternate
technologies on both Windows 95 and other windowed OSs. Promising WordPerfect
access to the NameSpace extension APIs and then withdrawing them meant that
Novell had to start developing the alternative much later and therefore
Microsoft Office could capture the market with their own middleware
environment.
Once customers were committed to Microsoft middleware that
only ran on Windows and Apple's OS, there was no chance of them choosing WP on
both Windows and other competing OSs.
Withholding the NameSpace
extension APIs was key to the previous case. The deception is key to the
middleware argument in that it prevented the takeup of the Windows 95
competitive WP middleware.
Novell seem to think that the judge will see
this, immediately. That the judge forgot his previous findings and even his
succinct repeat of the issues just a day before means that Novell need to be
explicit.
Novell also needs to demonstrate senior management commitment
to the WP middleware support of other OS platforms, otherwise there is no
middleware competition with Windows 95. As it is, they are pounding away on
proving the deception, but they are not showing that the deception reduced
competition with Windows by other windowing operating systems that would also
run WP.
--- Regards
Ian Al
Software Patents: It's the disclosed functions in the patent, stupid! [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
|
|