01.20.11
Posted in Europe, Patents at 6:45 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
(ODF | PDF | English/original)
Resumen: Artículos recientes que arrojan luz sobre la situación de patentes en Europa, incluida su aplicación.
ESTA es la última parte de una larga serie de artículos sobre las patentes de software. Es más bien una lista de artículos un poco huérfanos. Anteriormente hemos tratado con tristes noticias sobre la segunda versión del Marco Europeo de Interoperabilidad EIF [1[http://techrights.org/2010/12/20/red-hat-oracle-response/], 2[http://techrights.org/2010/12/19/assessments-of-eifv2/], 3[http://techrights.org/2010/12/20/interpretations-of-eifv2/], 4[http://techrights.org/2010/12/21/novell-is-slammed-by-groklaw/], 5[http://techrights.org/2010/12/23/more-reactions-to-eifv2/]], las patentes que Microsoft y la trístemente célebre BSA lograrón empujar. Jochen Friedrich dice que es una conciliación [http://arebentisch.wordpress.com/2011/01/05/jochen-friedrich-eif-v2-is-a-conciliation/]:
Claro, el valor de la primera encarnación del Marco Europeo de Interoperabilidad fue que se comenzó a estar expuesta a los ataques. Sin embargo, el documento político apenas se leyó y parecía más a un programa general de trabajo. En realidad, el EIF v1 es un documento sin importancia apenas capaz de generar resultados importantes en el campo, en particular, no en las partes de su contenido que no fueron controvertidos como el multilingüismo. La Comisión Europea publica periódicamente “comunicaciones” oficiales que no generan resultados directos sino que son seguidos por más de lo mismo, la próxima estrategia, el Libro Verde, documento, orden del día. Ni el EIF v1 v2 ni el EIF siquiera llegar a ese nivel de documentar el estado de menor importancia de una “comunicación”. A mí me parece que la India tuvo mejores conclusiones de la EIF v1 como configurar un documento directamente en la interoperabilidad. La mayoría de los críticos y los defensores son inducir a error sobre el papel de la EIF v2 en un marco general de las próximas interoperabilidad de la UE de arquitectura y no para ver cómo el EIF v1 fue sacrificado, como un señuelo que obtener el EIF v2.
Por cierto, EDRI publica este aviso sobre acciones de cesación [http://www.edri.org/edrigram/number9.1/ipr-enforcement-plan-ec]:
Justo antes de Navidad, la Comisión Europea publicó su informe sobre la aplicación de la Directiva sobre Aplicación de derechos de propiedad intelectual.
El texto, mientras que por escrito en términos bastante neutrales, muestran sutilmente los planes de la Comisión para la aplicación de los derechos de propiedad intelectual y los peligros que estos tienen en los derechos de los ciudadanos. Dos puntos en particular destacan – la elusión de la Directiva sobre comercio electrónico, en particular, para revocar la prohibición de imponer una “obligación general de supervisión” en los proveedores de Internet, y el debilitamiento previsto del régimen de la UE sobre protección de datos para el beneficio del derecho de autor los titulares.
La EPO es su parte de trabajo para ampliar su ámbito o jurisdicción más allá de Europa. “Las patentes europeas pueden llegar a ser válida en Marruecos”, dice este post [http://www.eplawpatentblog.com/eplaw/2010/12/epo-european-patents-may-become-valid-in-morocco.html]:
El presidente de la Oficina Europea de Patentes (OEP), Benoît Battistelli y el Ministro marroquí de Industria, Comercio y Nuevas Tecnologías, Ahmed Reda Chami, han firmado un acuerdo sobre la validación de solicitudes de patentes europeas concedidas y las patentes europeas en Marruecos. El acuerdo entrará en vigor una vez que la legislación de aplicación necesaria ha sido aprobada por el Parlamento marroquí.
Anoche nos enteramos de “la mejorada cooperación en el ámbito de la creación de la protección por patente unitaria [http://www.europarl.europa.eu/oeil/file.jsp?id=5891112¬iceType=null&language=en]“, que es un inla tento de globalizar aún más los sistemas de patentes y en la manera de aumentar el daño y, probablemente, añadir las patentes de software [a través de la Fundación para una Infraestructura de Información Libre FFII]. Bueno, no tan rápido! Italia y España se oponen a pesar de intento de chantaje [1[http://techrights.org/2010/11/28/nichi-vendola-under-fire/], 2[http://techrights.org/2010/12/08/ficpi-secretary-general-on-spain/]] y Axel Horns, un abogado de patentes, dice: “¡Viva La patente de la UE – pero un nuevo Tribunal de la Patente de la UE del sistema está muerto? [http://www.ipjur.com/blog2/index.php?/archives/188-Long-Live-The-EU-Patent-But-A-New-EU-Patent-Court-System-Is-Dead.html]”
De lo contrario, el grupo de cooperación reforzada podría refrendar los textos legales necesarios muy pronto, a partir de la puesta en práctica a principios del año que viene. Sin embargo, hay otro obstáculo: Incluso el sistema de reducción establecido en virtud del régimen de cooperación reforzada será necesario revisar la Convención Europea de Patentes (EPC) por medio de una conferencia diplomática de conformidad con el artículo 172 del CPE. Italia y España podría, al menos en teoría, tratar de obstruir la conferencia de este tipo. Sin embargo, el quórum de la mayoría de dos tercios de conformidad con el artículo 172 (2) del CPE se pueden satisfacer incluso sin Italia y España. Y, si, después de la Conferencia Diplomática, Italia y España no ratificar una versión enmendada de la CPE a su debido tiempo, serán expulsados del EPC de acuerdo con el artículo 172 (4) de la misma.
Horns también dijo [http://twitter.com/axelhorns/status/20953975054409728] que la “Comisión de la UE [es] sobre las TIC para llevar a cabo varias interesantes y / o estudios relacionados con patentes – http://tinyurl.com/2wdjutz”
Como ejemplo de un estudio, ver este nuevo trabajo titulado “Protesta de Internet en la política europea: el caso del activismo digital” [PDF [http://www.certop.fr/DEL/IMG/pdf_IJEP_ybreindl_final.pdf]]. Para citar el resumen:
Instituciones europeas, especialmente el Parlamento Europeo, son lugares de acceso para redes de activistas digitales que desean influir en la política de decisiones sobre cuestiones de derechos de propiedad intelectual, la regulación de Internet y el respeto de los derechos civiles en entornos digitales. Nos referimos a estas redes como “activismo digital”. Son más o menos libremente sus raíces en la cultura hacker y son intensamente haciendo uso de herramientas en línea para organizar y consolidar una identidad colectiva y construir una esfera pública transnacional. Este estudio se centra en el “no a las patentes de software”, campaña liderada por este movimiento que tuvo como objetivo influir en la directiva sobre la patentabilidad de las invenciones implementadas en ordenador (2002-2005). Al discutir las técnicas de promoción – tanto online como offline – que han sido desarrolladas por esta red activista digital, dan una idea de las luchas de poder que están teniendo lugar actualmente en Europa, sino también en otras regiones del mundo.
Relacionados con el activismo no es este nuevo artículo “Las patentes de bloqueo y la protesta política” [http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2011/01/blocking-patents-and-political-protest.html]:
Otra forma de pensar de esto es que una patente puede ser adquirida con el único propósito de detener ciertos tipos de expresión. Usted puede llamar a esta discriminación de contenido o una especie de bloqueo de la patente. Creo que esto es realmente preocupante una vez que se combina con la expansión de la materia patentable a los métodos de negocio. Aquí está un ejemplo:
Imagine que en 1960 los métodos comerciales son patentables. Un grupo segregacionista que está pensando fuera de la caja decide solicitar una patente en plantón en las protestas. La patente se concede. Cuando los activistas de derechos civiles en Greensboro iniciar su demostración (en el mostrador de comidas representado anteriormente en el Smithsonian), son demandados por infracción.
En cuanto al informe que dice que el “tribunal de la UE discuten las patentes de células madre embrionarias”[http://www.euractiv.com/en/innovation/eu-court-discuss-patents-embryonic-stem-cells-news-501154] Glyn Moody le preguntó: “las patentes son más importante que la ética?”
El debate interminable sobre las patentes de células madre embrionarias humanas (hESCs) recibirán fresco viento en sus velas hoy en día como el Tribunal de Justicia Europeo (TJCE) celebra una audiencia para discutir la definición de “embriones humanos y su uso industrial y comercial.
Ahora, mire lo que las Salas de Apelaciones de la OEP está haciendo: [a través de David Hammerstein] [http://www.visaepatentes.com/2010/12/system-for-financial-transactions.html]
En caso T 1051-1007, Técnico de la OEP Sala de Recurso 3.4.03 decidió el fondo del EP 1 365 368 de Corea del proveedor de servicios móviles de SK Telecom. La solicitud se refiere a un sistema para la ejecución de las transacciones financieras en una cuenta móvil que se emite a un suscriptor de telefonía móvil y administrativo gestionado por el proveedor de servicios, mientras que una transacción con la cuenta móvil se efectúa por una transacción entre una cuenta bancaria del abonado y las cuentas intermedias (“cuentas jurídicas cuerpo”) del proveedor de servicios móviles a diferentes bancos.
El mismo autor, Falk Metzler, dice que Nueva Zelanda “Directivas Tratan de Crear “Software Incrustable” patentable. Sin especificar este término jurídico” [http://www.visaepatentes.com/2011/01/nz-ipo-guidelines-try-to-render.html]
En abril de 2010, en el parlamento de Nueva Zelanda, votaron a favor de un importante proyecto de ley de Patentes de reforma para reforzar las normas de la patentabilidad de las invenciones implementadas en el software (véase el anuncio relacionado). El proyecto de ley, redactado por el Comité Selecto de Comercio en julio de 2010, aceptó que “la protección por patentes de software es incompatible con el modelo de código abierto” y que “los programas informáticos deben ser excluidos de la protección de patentes ya que las patentes de software pueden sofocar la innovación y la competencia” – intensamente acompañado por las organizaciones de cabildeo -grupos de presión- diferentes. Cláusula 15 (3A) de la Ley de Patentes ahora dice lo siguiente:
Un programa de ordenador no es una invención patentable.
Para mayores antecedentes sobre Nueva Zelanda ver esta página wiki [http://techrights.org/wiki/index.php/Software_Patents_in_New_Zealand]. Es una situación similar a la que prevaleció en Europa, donde las patentes de software no son legales en teoría, pero existen lagunas para eludir las restricciones, en particular mediante la vinculación a un “dispositivo”, al menos en la solicitud de patente. █
Many thanks to Eduardo Landaveri of the Spanish portal of Techrights.
Permalink
Send this to a friend
Posted in FSF, Microsoft, Novell, OSI, Patents at 2:33 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Summary: Novell’s patents and their destination at CPTN/Microsoft/AttachMSFT [sic] are coming under fire by the FSFE, OSI, and FSF (the latter two formally complain to the US Department of Justice)
“OSI and FSF jointly refer CPTN purchase of Novell patents to US Department of Justice,” Simon Phipps writes early in the morning. For some background see [1, 2, 3, 4, 5].
So the people behind “open source” and the FSF too (although Michael and Simon already have good relationships with the FSF) have this to say:
January 19, 2011 (update 2) – The Antitrust Division of the US Department of Justice has acknowledged receipt of the following correspondence (with attachment):
I am writing to you this morning in my capacity as President of the Open Source Initiative, a US 501(c)3 non-profit organization. Last month the OSI filed a statement with the German Federal Cartel Office (FCO) outlining our deep concerns about a proposed transaction whereby four companies, Microsoft, Oracle, Apple, and EMC, would create a new non-practicing entity (NPE) to acquire and hold Novell’s entire portfolio of 882 patents. Since making that filing, we have been joined by the Free Software Foundation (FSF) and have updated that statement to represent that both our communities–the open source community and the free software community–are concerned that CPTN represents a potential broadside not against any particular product in the market today, but against one of the only viable sources of competition for these companies in software today: the free, libre, and open source software (FLOSS) communities.
Attached is our joint statement that reflects both our consensus thinking on the subject and our joint appeal that DOJ investigate the true purpose of CPTN.
If there is any other information you require from myself, any OSI board member, or the OSI as a whole, please do not hesitate to let us know. Thank you very much for your consideration.
Michael Tiemann
President, Open Source Initiative
Sadly, the US Department of Justice is worthless. It’s occupied by Microsoft cronies and right now it’s occupied with attacking Wikileaks, treating it as though it is a terrorist group.
Phipps later expanded in his IDG-run blog, noting that “OSI And FSF In Unprecedented Collaboration To Protect Software Freedom” (not just “Openness”, so well done, Simon Phipps):
Faced with a potentially large threat to free/libre and open source software from patent consortium CPTN, the two organisations have collaborated publicly for the first time.
“Novell folks seem to have vested interest in infecting Free Software with Microsoft patents,” gnufreex wrote some hours ago. “Maybe that was part of the deal” (OOXML, Mono, and Moonlight are obvious examples of it). Boycott Novell. █
Permalink
Send this to a friend
Posted in Australia, Microsoft, Open XML at 1:41 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Summary: Australia mandates Microsoft’s proprietary OOXML, according to reports
THE Australian government has just reinforced Microsoft monopoly by deciding that citizens should use Microsoft’s expensive, proprietary, and buggy products to communicate with public servants. Here is critical report from Australia (example of good journalism):
That particular OOXML standard was rejected by the International Standards Organisation (ISO) because it was littered with Windows-platform dependencies, according to its opponents.
The ODF Alliance, backed by IBM and Google, has warned about the adoption of the ECMA-376 standard by governments.
“The use of ECMA-376 essentially ties the adopter to Microsoft Office,” the lobby group warned in October last year in a document entitled “What Government’s Need to Know”.
That standard, it pointed out, contained “many Windows-platform dependencies” that Microsoft was forced to remove under the ISO process in order to get it approved as ISO-29500 — a standard that the Microsoft Office 2010 product has so far failed to comply with.
To quote Slashdot‘s summary:
“The Australian Government has released a common operating environment desktop policy that — among security controls aimed at reducing the potential for leaks of Government data — mandates the ECMA-376 version of Microsoft’s Office Open XML (OOXML) standard and productivity suites that can ‘read and write’ the .docx format, effectively locking the country’s public servants into using Microsoft Office. The policy [PDF] also appears to limit desktop operating systems to large, off-the-shelf commercial offerings at the expense of smaller distributions.”
To repeat some stories about Australia & OOXML (there are more):
Let us remember people in Australia whom Microsoft paid to lobby for OOXML and sneakily edit Wikipedia [1, 2, 3]. █
Permalink
Send this to a friend
Posted in Microsoft at 1:27 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Summary: Matt Miszewski, a general manager of Worldwide Government for Microsoft, quits the abusive monopolist
According to a new press release:
In his new role, Miszewski will lead salesforce.com’s global public sector initiatives to help governments make their citizens more successful through the power of cloud computing.
We found just 3 more articles about it [1, 2, 3], expanding very little on the press release. Todd Bishop says that “Miszewski was previously CIO for the state of Wisconsin.” Talk about lobbying government after working for government… █
Permalink
Send this to a friend
Posted in Google, Microsoft at 1:15 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Photo by JohnAStele
Summary: Johnny Chung Lee moves to Google and abandons what he made for Microsoft
As Microsoft Nick points out, Brad Brooks is "the third key Microsoftie to reportedly leave the software juggernaut this week" (pointed out in the article “Microsoft’s executive exodus continues”).
So who else is there?
Mary Jo Microsoft says that Johnny Chung Lee, a superstar known mostly for the KINect, is also quitting Microsoft:
Lee joined Microsoft in June 2008 after graduating with a doctoral degree in human-computer interaction from Carnegie Mellon University. His research focused on projection technology, multitouch input, augmented reality, brain-computer interfaces, and haptics. He also is known for his Wii hacking work.
Mary Jo Microsoft tries to do damage control by mentioning some hires that we mentioned recently. The news also got covered in:
Johnny Chung Lee was not management and he has not been in Microsoft for a long time, so it’s doubtful that he could change the corporate culture at Google. Here is Johnny blogging about his new job. █
Permalink
Send this to a friend
Posted in Microsoft, Vista 7, Windows at 12:57 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Summary: The Windows marketing corporate vice president (man behind Vista 7 marketing) quits Microsoft, but he joins his former colleagues in another company
Juniper Networks is already filled with many ex-Microsoft executives, including the company’s current CEO. Well, according to this report, the Windows marketing corporate vice president joins them.
Brad Brooks joins the list of many others, not just presidents/vice presidents who quit Microsoft but also those who joined Juniper Networks immediately afterwards, e.g. [1, 2, 3].
One quick thing to add about it is that the fact that people who are associated with Windows are leaving simply means that something is not working there. One may often wonder, what is it that proprietary software actually does to limit people’s freedom, by design? Here is an answer from the news:
Microsoft’s much-maligned operating system Vista has proven the third most effective PC tool available to parents to filter out inappropriate web content for children, according to tests by the European Commission.
But none of the 26 products tested by the EC achieved a perfect score [pdf] when it came to filter capabilities.
As Glyn Moody put it, “MS Vista finds its niche at last: censorship”.
The reality behind Vista 7 suggests that it’s just like Vista under the hood, in which case the above applies to it too. Vista 7 is not doing it for Microsoft because Windows profits continue to decline. Brooks’ departure therefore makes a lot of sense. █
Permalink
Send this to a friend
Posted in Deception, Microsoft, Search at 12:40 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Summary: Rogue site harms people’s computers by installing “a toolbar and chang[ing] their search provider and home page to Bing.”
Included in the logs just posted is a story we only posted in daily links due to lack of time. The short story is that Microsoft is in the midst of another Bong [sic] scandal and shortly after it was revealed Microsoft retreated from it:
Is Facebook’s third largest advertiser really a site that tries to trick people into switching to Bing? Apparently not. Still, Bing’s not happy with the tactics and is ending its relationship with the publisher. The site, Make-My-Baby.com, now appears to have gone down. But earlier today, it was suggesting that people needed a plug-in to use it — one that would install a toolbar and change their search provider and home page to Bing. The site had allowed people to create baby characters….OK, I have some more answers from Bing. Make-My-Baby was an affiliate of Zugo….Bing also confirmed that it continues to have a relationship with Zugo. That also means that all the people who had their pages changed by Make-My-Baby will continue to get redirected to the benefit of both Zugo and Bing, as best I can tell, despite the fact that they were obtained in a way that Bing disagrees with.
Our readers did not all buy Microsoft’s story and to quote last night’s conversation about it:
| DaemonFC |
I guess they got sick of all the “Why doesn’t Last.FM work?” posts |
22:32 |
| oiaohm |
Don’t worry its normally only temp. MinceR |
22:33 |
| oiaohm |
First stage create more jobs than what is required. |
22:34 |
| oiaohm |
Second stage restruct the departments because they are too expensive. |
22:34 |
| oiaohm |
Third stage sacked too many todo the jobs. |
22:34 |
| oiaohm |
then return to first stage. |
22:35 |
| oiaohm |
This is kinda a never ending goverment cycle. |
22:35 |
| –> cubezzz has joined this channel (~cubeman@maxhost.org). |
22:35 |
| –> tessier has joined this channel (~treed@mail.copilotco.com). |
22:35 |
| –> TRIdentica has joined this channel (~twitfolk@216.105.40.114). |
22:35 |
| –> TRT has joined this channel (~twitfolk@216.105.40.114). |
22:35 |
| oiaohm |
“first time the FCC has ever allowed discrimination on the Internet” Boy people have short memories. |
22:36 |
| oiaohm |
Computserv anyone. |
22:36 |
| MinceR |
CompuServe isn’t internet, afaik |
22:37 |
| oiaohm |
It was a wrapper over the internet that was used to restrict access. |
22:37 |
| –> twitter has joined this channel (~pbj@173-17-111-185.client.mchsi.com). |
22:40 |
| twitter |
Read Write web notices that a toolbar scam is part of Bing market share gain. http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/facebooks_3rd_biggest_advertiser _is_a_bing_affilia.php |
22:41 |
| TechrightsBot-tr |
Title: Facebook’s 3rd Biggest Advertiser is (Allegedly) a Bing Affiliate Scam (With Updates) .::. Size~: 74.46 KB |
22:41 |
| twitter |
That and the forced default on cell phones, new computers inflicted with Windows, etc. |
22:42 |
| oiaohm |
twitter: Problem is I cannot see who is behind that. |
22:43 |
| MinceR |
duh |
22:44 |
| MinceR |
it’s m$ |
22:44 |
| twitter |
you really can’t tell where hundreds of thousands of dollars for a make_my_baby.com scam comes from? |
22:44 |
| MinceR |
they’re still struggling to get people to use bìng |
22:44 |
| twitter |
no one would put up that kind of money on their own. |
22:44 |
| twitter |
It had to come from Microsoft. |
22:44 |
| MinceR |
they used to pay people to make them use whatever bìng happened to be called at the time |
22:45 |
| MinceR |
this is a different approach to the same goal |
22:45 |
| oiaohm |
I have not looked close enough at that. |
22:45 |
| oiaohm |
to check if the 3rd biggest has hidden any other back doors. |
22:46 |
| twitter |
this one hides in the fine print and the usual “you need a plugin to do this” |
22:46 |
| oiaohm |
Exactly what else is in the plugin twitter |
22:46 |
| twitter |
they are obvious frauds, ohm. |
22:46 |
| oiaohm |
I know they are frauds |
22:46 |
| oiaohm |
But are they are bot net master as well. |
22:46 |
| twitter |
so there’s no telling what kind of malware they push |
22:47 |
| oiaohm |
Really the total mix of malware will give us a better clue who they are. |
22:47 |
| twitter |
just like there’s no telling what Microsoft sends back to themselves via Vista and Windows 7 encrypted communications |
22:48 |
| twitter |
It’s someone who spent hundreds of thousands of dollars to promote Bing. They might also be a bot herder but that is irrelevant and the Bing issue is proved. |
22:49 |
| <– abeNd-org has left this server (Quit: Leaving.). |
22:49 |
| twitter |
Microsoft disowned them, as they do all of their scape goats. |
22:49 |
| DaemonFC |
Compuserve was an AOL-type service, walled garden |
22:50 |
| DaemonFC |
they both added internet access later |
22:50 |
| DaemonFC |
then AOL bought Compuserve |
22:50 |
| DaemonFC |
for a while, the Compuserve browser was based on Gecko, not IE/Trident |
22:50 |
| DaemonFC |
I think it went back to IE though |
22:50 |
| DaemonFC |
there was a beta version of AOL that used Gecko |
22:51 |
| oiaohm |
AOL netscape |
22:51 |
| twitter |
Microsoft Software, so bad the company has to pay people to use it. |
22:51 |
| DaemonFC |
no, the AOL client |
22:51 |
| DaemonFC |
there was a beta you had to be invited to |
22:51 |
| DaemonFC |
it used Gecko as the AOL browser’s renderer |
22:51 |
| twitter |
AOL bought Netscape, it was unnatural for them to not use the browser. |
22:52 |
| oiaohm |
When AOL bought netscape they did a hybred. |
22:52 |
| oiaohm |
Gecko trident |
22:52 |
| DaemonFC |
they never really used Netscape much |
22:52 |
| oiaohm |
In the AOL browser and in netscape |
22:52 |
| oiaohm |
What was basically the same thing. |
22:52 |
| twitter |
It was gone in the blink of an eye, then they fired the developers. |
22:52 |
| DaemonFC |
the Windows version uses IE/Trident and the Mac version uses Webkit |
22:53 |
| DaemonFC |
way back when, they used their own rendering engine though |
22:53 |
| twitter |
DaemonFC, uses AOL on Mac? Wow! |
22:53 |
| MinceR |
lol |
22:53 |
| DaemonFC |
yes, it has Topspeed Technology to make my 56k modem go VROOM |
22:54 |
| DaemonFC |
uh huh |
22:54 |
| DaemonFC |
 |
22:54 |
| MinceR |
that can’t be good for the modem :> |
22:54 |
| twitter |
zzzzoooooommmmmm |
22:54 |
| –> dtech has joined this channel (5da06baa@gateway/web/freenode/ip.93.160.107.170). |
22:54 |
| twitter |
have fun with the Bing news. That search engine is not going anywhere soon. |
22:55 |
| <– twitter has left this channel. |
22:55 |
| * DaemonFC throws a Winmodem at Mincer |
22:55 |
| * MinceR parries it with a BFS |
22:55 |
| [Notice] -TRIdentica to #techrights- [boycottnovell/@boycottnovell] Another Software Company’s CEO (Named Steve) Expected to Leave http://is.gd/oyxBuS #microsoft #ballmer #xbox #kin |
22:57 |
| [Notice] -TRIdentica to #techrights- [schestowitz/@schestowitz] Another Software Company’s CEO (Named Steve) Expected to Leave http://is.gd/oyxBuS #microsoft #ballmer #xbox #kin #vista |
22:57 |
| TechrightsBot-tr |
Title: Another Software Company’s CEO (Named Steve) Expected to Leave | Techrights .::. Size~: 94.89 KB |
22:57 |
| oiaohm |
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=OTAwNQ I guess you have both seen this. |
22:57 |
| TechrightsBot-tr |
Title: Another Software Company’s CEO (Named Steve) Expected to Leave | Techrights .::. Size~: 94.89 KB |
22:57 |
| TechrightsBot-tr |
Title: [Phoronix] ULatencyD Enters The Linux World .::. Size~: 16.74 KB |
22:57 |
| MinceR |
oh, according to “How Does This Work?”, it could be independent of m$ |
22:57 |
| MinceR |
since it benefits Zugo as well |
22:58 |
| MinceR |
via affiliate commissions |
22:58 |
| oiaohm |
MinceR: link |
22:58 |
| MinceR |
same article |
22:59 |
| MinceR |
( http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/facebooks_3rd_biggest _advertiser_is_a_bing_affilia.php ) |
22:59 |
| TechrightsBot-tr |
Title: Facebook’s 3rd Biggest Advertiser is (Allegedly) a Bing Affiliate Scam (With Updates) .::. Size~: 74.46 KB |
22:59 |
| MinceR |
there’s a sidebar titled “How Does This Work?” on that page |
23:00 |
So what do you think? Innocent or damage control? █
Permalink
Send this to a friend
