A Few More Comments.

I wanted to make a few more comments regarding Microsoft's claims.

1) The claimed issues are comprised of how much liability? Are we talking a factor of hundreds of dollars per Linux install or are we talking a matter of a few cents to a few dollars per install?

From an individual stand point I'd say to Microsoft to go ahead and sue me. Yes I know that large businesses have larger investments and have a greater potential liability. But overall, I can't see Microsoft suing the vast majority of home users.

2) 235 (238) patents is a pretty small number overall. Considering the complexity of the kernel and of other applications potentially infringing I don't think that there's enough there to turn the thumb screws on any individual or company.

3) How many of those patents were already licensed to the likes of IBM or Sun? It seems pretty empty and stupid to make claims without stating the specifics especially when some or all of those might be covered by someone else. If I recall correctly, SUN entered into an agreement with Microsoft when Sun prevailed against Microsoft in that Open Office was indemnified against IP violations.

4) Of the remaining IP claims how many of them are covered by the likes of the EU anti-trust convictions? I know they are still entitled to their claims but if any/all of those are covered that'll serious reduce the liability of any given company or individual.

5) Why is the Open Source community not standing more firmly in forcing Microsoft to be forthcoming about which IPs are alleged in violation? It would seem that if we all just shut up and told Microsoft to put up they'd have little to hold against us.