On Sat, 25 Sep 2004, Michel Py wrote:
Yes, a patent could help but keep in mind that if Microsoft goes to
court about it it's not about winning, it's about bankrupting the small
guy with legal fees and gaining time to develop their own gig.
I am not sure that trying to patent SPF is a good idea, because it might
convey the message to patent lawyers that _if_ we try to patent SPF, it
also means that what Microsoft tries to patent is indeed patentable as
well, which I have a hard time to swallow. By trying to patent SPF, we
actually help MS getting through their own patent process.
Shifting the battle to the legal grounds is part of Microsoft's
strategy: they know we don't have the resources to win there. They don't
care if they win or not in court as long as the SPF community is
paralyzed by it.
...
Yes, SPF did waste 6 months with all this bullshit, but IMHO it was a
reasonable price to pay for the increased visibility. Without the failed
MS/SPF merger, SPF was not a big enough spot on any decider's radar to
go anywhere.
Now, time to move on. Stop worrying about the legal bullshit, you're
playing MS game if you do so. What is needed now is to DEPLOY. As Soon
As Possible. PR would be good, but how much $$$ is available for it (how
much did the T-shirt deal bring?) This still is an engineering matter
and should remain so.
Go back to your keyboards and get this thing rolling. Tomorrow. Morning,
preferably. Shoot for 100% clean, but settle for 99% clean. An imperfect
solution is better than MS' crap to rule the world again.
This is really insightful. And the more SPF users there are, the
less effective M$ harrassment of a few of them is.
--
Stuart D. Gathman <stuart(_at_)bmsi(_dot_)com>
Business Management Systems Inc. Phone: 703 591-0911 Fax: 703 591-6154
"Confutatis maledictis, flamis acribus addictis" - background song for
a Microsoft sponsored "Where do you want to go from here?" commercial.