decoration decoration
Stories

GROKLAW
When you want to know more...
decoration
For layout only
Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines
ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books
Your contributions keep Groklaw going.
To donate to Groklaw 2.0:

Groklaw Gear

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.


Contact PJ

Click here to email PJ. You won't find me on Facebook Donate Paypal


User Functions

Username:

Password:

Don't have an account yet? Sign up as a New User

No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.


What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments


Sponsors

Hosting:
hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster
I fear few real world companies will give things away for free. | 98 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
I fear few real world companies will give things away for free.
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, November 09 2012 @ 12:15 PM EST
No. IE was inferior in comparison to Netscape, and it is not that different
today. Look at the differences between Firefox and IE. Last time I checked, MS
still created an inferior product because it is NOT standards compliant (and the
little bit that they are is shaky at best). Lynx and W3c are better browsers
than IE in that regard.

We have inferior products because some companies can't seem to figure out how
this standards compliance thing works.

What if the situation were reversed? What if Microsoft had their say,
strong-armed 3wc to adopt changes to HTML which required a paid license from
Microsoft to be in compliance? Would you really want to pay to be in
compliance? I wouldn't. I like my freedom.

I have to say. I'm beginning to think that there is something that I'm just not
understanding, here. Explain to me how it is any different in principle for a
standards body to issue an encumbered standard (one that requires someone to pay
a troll toll in order to come into compliance) and someone trying to sneak
encumbered code into the Linux distro in hopes of snatching someone's purse?

It seems to me a really, really bad idea.

If a company wants to make money on a product they have the rights to, then
that's fine. Let them make money from the product. It just doesn't make any
sense (to me) for the standards body to be involved in it.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )