Valid point. But the question is, will it just be applied to
the compiler or the compiled code. As
stated elsewhere, the license is now published, the scope of
the IPR is NOT.
The scope is precisely defined in the license as the intersection between
the patent claims and the necessary claims required to implement the
spec.
This is a very complex legal argument, calling it trivial shows a
distinct lack of comprehension.
Your bullying tactics are still not worthy of your
intelligence (or perhaps I misjudge that).
What is 'bullying' about answering an argument with facts. You asserted
that the argument was trivial.
The literal interpretation of my statement was, and still is,
the "difference" that YOU stated is
"trivial and irrelevant", not the legal arguments themselves.
The difference between the patent and the realization of the patent
is the whole core of the legal arguments.
But it does not mean the copy is NOT encumbered, either. And
you keep forgetting that the IPR is
STILL UNSTATED!!! All we have been given is the
(unacceptable) license, but not what the license
covers!
Again, read the license, it is very clear that it covers the
intersection between any patent claims owned by or granted to
Microsoft and those needed to implement Sender-ID.