Microsoft business model depends on patent laws

[ideogram]

Split from: http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=7143189#post7143189


Comparative advantage is a law dealing with specialization, not with manufacturing, although it does play a role in what countries specialize in producing.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparative_advantage

A decline in manufacturing is always bad because that means less stuff is being produced.

Less stuff being produced locally means less stuff to trade for other stuff that is being produced abroad.

Unfortunately you don't believe that Microsoft or Intel produce anything so your calculations are off.

[michaelsuede]

Unfortunately you don't believe that Microsoft or Intel produce anything so your calculations are off.

Certainly I do, and I think the market has ways of financing such operations without patent protections.

For example, Microsoft could code its software with registration technology that will only allow updates if a copy of Windows has a valid subscription.

I have some Norton anti-virus software that works like this.

Norton actually distributes their anti-virus client for free on the internet, but they make you get a paid subscription for updates.

Last time I checked Norton is still in business and making money.

What a liberal like you doesn't see is the cronyism that patent protections enable. Because who do you think Microsoft's biggest license buyer is?

[geni]

For example, Microsoft could code its software with registration technology that will only allow updates if a copy of Windows has a valid subscription.


Been tried rather a lot of times. The tech always gets broken. It's actualy unclear if it's even possible to implement a secure trusted client on a PC.

[michaelsuede]

Been tried rather a lot of times. The tech always gets broken. It's actualy unclear if it's even possible to implement a secure trusted client on a PC.

sure it always gets broken, but if its a big enough hassle, people will pay.

no matter what technology a patch uses, chances are good someone will be able to apply it in a hack.

that still doesn't mean Microsoft should get patent protections that turn it into the biggest corporate monster on the face of the planet.

[geni]

that still doesn't mean Microsoft should get patent protections that turn it into the biggest corporate monster on the face of the planet.

Patent protections are largely irrelivant to microsft. They certianly don't appear to have formed a significant part of it's business model. In fact if anything patents are a liability from it's POV. Of the big players IBM have a better patent portfolio and microsoft looks like a tempting larget to patent trolls.

[michaelsuede]

Patent protections are largely irrelivant to microsft. They certianly don't appear to have formed a significant part of it's business model. In fact if anything patents are a liability from it's POV. Of the big players IBM have a better patent portfolio and microsoft looks like a tempting larget to patent trolls.

Have a look at Microsoft's licencing revenues.

The only way they can get away with having licensing revenues (which generate the bulk of their income) is due to patent/copyright protections.

[geni]

Have a look at Microsoft's licencing revenues.

The only way they can get away with having licensing revenues (which generate the bulk of their income) is due to patent/copyright protections.

You might want to learn the difference between copyright and patent.

[lomiller]

Certainly I do, and I think the market has ways of financing such operations without patent protections.

Microsoft protets it’s IP primarily with Copyrights, not Patents.


For example, Microsoft could code its software with registration technology that will only allow updates if a copy of Windows has a valid subscription.


They do, but even with it being illegal it’s almost impossible to stop people from bypassing it. The fact that you don’t know this suggests you are probaably running a stolen copy of Windows, so you would probabaoly find yourself in a great deal of trouble if leagal matters were handled by “private security firms”

BTW, these cracked versions of windows ususaly have their own profit model based on puting trogens and maleware into their install so they can steal your personal information and put it up for sale or direct you to their prefered location when you search. Bad deal all round...



I have some Norton anti-virus software that works like this.

Norton actually distributes their anti-virus client for free on the internet, but they make you get a paid subscription for updates.

I’m not sure why anyone would bother stealing that bloatware, but if there were no legal protection it would be simple enought to set up your own download site and modify the client to get it’s updates from there.

[lomiller]

sure it always gets broken, but if its a big enough hassle, people will pay.

Why should it be an inconvenience? What you are suggesting means only one person has to crack it, then repackage it and sell the result. With what you are suggesting it costs billions for Microsoft to develop and they then have to compete on cost against someone why can crack it in their basement and sell it for next to nothing.

[Dancing David]

Certainly I do, and I think the market has ways of financing such operations without patent protections.

For example, Microsoft could code its software with registration technology that will only allow updates if a copy of Windows has a valid subscription.


Big silly thought! Try to update Windows without a valid license, what happens?

There is the Windows Genuine series of tools.

Silly!

[JoelKatz]

The only way they can get away with having licensing revenues (which generate the bulk of their income) is due to patent/copyright protections.As others have pointed out, the patent issue is minor. However, the copyright issue is also fairly minor, as Microsoft gets most of its intellectual property protection through EULAs which are a creature of contract, not copyright. They do this because copyright law actually gives consumers more rights than Microsoft would prefer they have.