Documentation Compliance Means MS Can Resume Collecting Protocol Royalties 139
angry tapir writes "Microsoft may begin collecting royalties again for licensing some protocols because clear technical documentation is now available, according to the US Department of Justice. The change comes after the DOJ issued its latest joint status report regarding its 2002 antitrust settlement with Microsoft. The settlement required Microsoft to make available technical documentation that would allow other vendors to make products that are interoperable with Windows."
Re:Outrageous (Score:5, Informative)
You can't copyright recipes, and anything can be regarded as a trade secret.
Re:protocols (Score:2, Informative)
The DMCA only prohibits reverse engineering to circumvent "copy protection" mechanisms. It would be circular reasoning to assert that the copyrighted material being protected is the protocol itself.
Re:Outrageous (Score:4, Informative)
A protocol is simply a statement of facts.
Facts are not copyrightable.
Sweat of the brow does not determine if something is deserving of copyright either. It must have _some_ creativity. Indeed, this is why software for years was not deserving of copyright, because it was considered a "list of instructions for a machine" instead of creative. This changed in the early 80's I believe (correct me if it was earlier).
A recipe is not copyrightable. It is a list of facts to reach a goal. The artwork, layout, etc, however, is. Thus cookbooks are copyrighted.
Software is unique in that it's now protected by both copyright, as if it's art, _and_ patent, as if it's a machine. Why one needs both is baffling to me.
--
BMO
Re:Decision to force them to document more protoco (Score:2, Informative)
Oh, do you mean these :)
Microsoft Exchange Server 2010 Protocol Documentation [microsoft.com]
Here is the announcement from Feb 2008: Microsoft Makes Strategic Changes in Technology and Business Practices to Expand Interoperability [microsoft.com].
Bing is your friend. [bing.com]
-Foredecker
Re:Outrageous (Score:4, Informative)
Just mix these commonly-found spices together! Great when used for skinless chicken fingers too.
2 tablespoons salt
2 cups flour
2 tablespoons pepper
4 tablespoons paprika
1 teaspoon garlic salt
1 tablespoon mustard, ground
1 tablespoon French thyme, ground
1 tablespoon sweet basil
1 teaspoon oregano, ground
1 tablespoon jamaica ginger, ground
http://www.bubhub.com.au/community/forums/showthread.php?t=14201&page=2 [bubhub.com.au]
Re:Outrageous (Score:3, Informative)
You can't put out your protocol under anything less than an "all implementations are free" license and then pretend you're supporting interopability.
Of course you can. It's called "reasonable and non-discriminating", and it's when you license your protocol to anyone who asks, for the same price regardless of who asks, and that price is reasonable. See MPEG4 etc.
It can be argued whether this is open, but interoperable - sure.
Re:protocols (Score:4, Informative)
Not only that, the DMCA explicitly allows reverse engineering of software in order to allow for interoperability with other applications:
see paragraph (f) here:
http://static.chillingeffects.org/1201.shtml [chillingeffects.org]
Microsoft has no ground to stand on from the copyright angle, so it's attempting to imlpement the same limitations from a software patent angle. Which currently has no value in most of the civilized world.
Samba has a license for many of the key patents (Score:5, Informative)
http://samba.org/samba/PFIF/ [samba.org]
Samba and any other free software project (via the PFIF) has a royalty free license to most of the patents that are important for these protocols.
There are some patents that are excluded from this (see appendix 4 of the agreement for a list of the excluded patents), and we do indeed need to avoid infringement of those patents. That has not so far proved to be an insurmountable obstacle, although it is an inconvenience.
Cheers, Tridge
Re: Supposed KFC Recipe (Score:2, Informative)
Actually, rumour has it that in the 80s, KFC switched to using just salt, pepper, MSG and flour. I do think the modern version is less tasty.