You miss the point of the op-ed. Yes, software implementations are copyrightable and licensable. Perens isn't saying that MS should make their implementation of CIFS anything other than they already do. However, it's been a hallmark of competition for a competitor to simply look at the way the product works and the reverse engineer it. They can then license their implementation any way they choose. And this has happened the SAMBA project engineered their own implementation of CIFS and it runs on any *NIX system that wants windows file sharing compatibility.
However, what Perens *is* saying is that if Microsoft patents certain features or qualities of its implementation, then if SAMBA wants to make an interoperable product, they have to pay royalties to Microsoft in order to be able to use the *patented* (not copyrighted) technologies. And it's this type of IP patent abuse that has got Perens and the entire computing world (except those with legal monopolies gained from unjust patents) scared $hitless.
Well, your uid implies you're not exactly new around here, so you should know that 'PUTTING TEH $ AS S IN TEH MMIRCO$$$OFT IS TEH FUNNY MUNOPULY!!!!!!!!' This is just an extension, and seems now to be recognised as standard practice.
Just be sure to remember that it's not childish or tired, nor does it show the author to be a prick.
So? (Score:3, Insightful)
That's what "freedom" is all about. You get to choose how your code can be used. MS has decided, now it's up to us to honor that decision.
Otherwise, you have no right to expect anyone to respect licences like the GPL.
Re:So? (Score:5, Insightful)
However, what Perens *is* saying is that if Microsoft patents certain features or qualities of its implementation, then if SAMBA wants to make an interoperable product, they have to pay royalties to Microsoft in order to be able to use the *patented* (not copyrighted) technologies. And it's this type of IP patent abuse that has got Perens and the entire computing world (except those with legal monopolies gained from unjust patents) scared $hitless.
Re:So? (Score:2, Funny)
Am I alright if that read "scared <a variable named hitless>"?
I was scratching for full 10 seconds before I realized '$'=='s'
Re:So? (Score:1)
Just be sure to remember that it's not childish or tired, nor does it show the author to be a prick.
Re:So? (Score:2)
It pisses of the astro turfers at slashdot.
It pisses off trolls.
I $ay go for it!.
Re:So? (Score:1)
But I had to parse by evaluating
$_ =~ s/\$/s/g;
I guess that I've just been using Perl too long...