ONE THING THAT INTEL and Microsoft have in common is that both are committing crimes to gain and to protect their monopolies and when legal action is brought against them they just pay a bribe to have the evidence destroyed and for the legal cases to go away. Both Microsoft and Intel were found guilty in multiple continents and they had colluded for many years (recent example [1, 2]) as they rubbed each others' back and forced smaller competitors out of the market.

“Intel submits that if New Zealand chooses to provide restrictions on the patentability of software, those who will suffer the most include citizens of the country, and particularly those who develop software.”
      --David Simon, IntelIntel's pretense (PR lies) is a subject we wrote about before. Do not believe what Intel says. It wants the world to perceive it as a GNU/Linux friend so that its hardware gets bought by people with a clue in computing. It's a PR exercise. Intel paid SCO and attacked OLPC (which was Linux-based), then covered it up. Moreover, notes the FFII's president upon this release of submissions regarding software patents in New Zealand, that "Intel says [PDF] you cannot distinguish hardware from software, very shocking from the number manufacturer of hardware" (does Intel 'own' the transistor yet?)

We have looked at the said submission and were appalled. There is also a very shameful lie there from David Simon (on behalf of Intel). He said that "Intel submits that if New Zealand chooses to provide restrictions on the patentability of software, those who will suffer the most include citizens of the country, and particularly those who develop software." The very opposite is true, but don't let facts gets in Intel's way. Shame on Intel.

Glyn Moody notes that "#Microsoft fights desperately for #swpats" in there, but we already knew that. Microsoft and its front groups in New Zealand are a subject we explored quite thoroughly before (see this wiki page for details). The FFII's president adds that the "European Commission DG Trade commenting on software patents guidelines in New Zealand, while EPC is not even EU law" (in New Zealand they try to legitimise software patents in the same way they do in Europe, by painting software as hardware or "device"). Mr Vassilis Koutsiouris from the intellectual property unit is deceiving New Zealand [PDF]. Is this what European taxpayers pay for? To harm themselves and empower monopolies whose billionaires have no qualm about lying? ⬆

[Disclosure: Posted from an AMD box]