[odf-discuss] On covenants

[Thomas Zander]

On Sunday 05 November 2006 17:15, Alex Hudson wrote:
> Thomas Zander wrote:
> > The mistake in logic I see Alex making is that the only reason he
> > thinks you need permission is because there exists a piece of paper
> > giving you permission. Kinda.
>
> Actually, no - I'm well-versed with Microsoft's European patent
> claims (I have no idea about the US), some of which cover XML
> document technology, e.g.:
>
>     "Word-processing document stored in a single XML file"
>     http://v3.espacenet.com/textdoc?DB=EPODOC&IDX=EP1376387

Well, you just proved my point.

You assume that there are patents you _have_ to infringe upon to 
implement the spec. There is no real reason for you to think this apart 
from the fact that MS tells you its needed. Maybe there is a way to 
avoid it, which you have not seen.

You are probably thinking "But its obvious!" but Marbux already pointed 
out that this line of thought misses the point in something as rigid as 
contract law.
-- 
Thomas Zander
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.opendocumentfellowship.com/pipermail/odf-discuss/attachments/20061105/1d96a8ef/attachment-0002.pgp