Return to BSD News archive
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.carno.net.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!munnari.OZ.AU!news.Hawaii.Edu!news.uoregon.edu!tezcat!news.bbnplanet.com!cam-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!news.mathworks.com!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!199.171.20.9!news.nkn.net!dfw.nkn.net!news.panther.net!nemesis!uhclem From: uhclem@nemesis.lonestar.org (Frank Durda IV) Subject: Re: /etc/apple (was Re: Pentium Pro and FreeBSD) X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL5 Organization: The Big Blue Box Message-ID: <E3Jqrt.GtI@nemesis.lonestar.org> References: <5amv2s$gpl@odin.egate.net> Date: Sun, 5 Jan 1997 17:47:52 GMT Lines: 55 Xref: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc:33685 Ian Huang (huang@odin.egate.net) wrote: : I also heard that Apple has already been licenced for the Windows 95 OS : and it is trying to get a licence for WinNT from MS. What was that about? Seems unlikely, since the Windows '95 OEM license states that Microsoft gets free and royalty-free access to all of the OEMs patents, and that all other licensees of Windows '95 OEM also have access to your patents for free. This license effectively revokes US Patent law for PC companies wanting to stay in business. Sneaky. This is one of the reasons some OEMs waited until just hours before the launch date before caving in and signing the Windows '95 license. Millions of dollars in royalties one OEM was collecting from another over all sorts of patents would be void. When TI signed up, some other OEMs rushed to sign up simply to avoid being sued by TI over the power-on diagnostic patent (originally for a microwave oven) that TI keeps using against PC makers that appear to have money. So if Apple did sign up, AST could use Apples patents and vice versa and Microsoft could use both Apples and AST patents. The agreement DOES not give the OEMs access to ANY of Microsofts patents. That would be fair so we can't have that. Microsoft claims that only patents pertaining or related to technology in or required by Windows '95 are nullified by their license, but that's a pretty broad statement. Shoot the power supply is somewhat required to run Windows '95. One company I know effectively avoided the patent vacuum by creating a new company for "software", and had it sign the Windows '95 license, thus leaving the real companies modest patent portfolio undamaged. Any patents the software company files are filed under the name of the "real" company. Of course, now Microsoft has now decreed that no Microsoft applications may be run on non-Microsoft operating systems (read: emulators). Read the new license agreement. Even the Beta tester agreement is like this. Gee, these emulators must be better than we thought if they were enough of a bother to draw any attention. Microsoft also now says that none of their development tools and compilers may be used to build software that will run on non-Microsoft operating systems. That'll make building portable Java applications a trick using Microsofts stuff, or writing PC BIOS code. :-) Honest, Microsoft isn't a monopoly! :-) Frank Durda IV <uhclem@nemesis.lonestar.org>|"Ah, is the whittle bitty or uhclem%nemesis@rwsystr.nkn.net | Microsoft afrayed of those nasty | API emulators? Bad emulators! or ...letni!rwsys!nemesis!uhclem | Don't you go scaring Bill!" (c) 1997, ask before reprinting.