om (I begin all of my essay type pieces with 'om.) When I own a piece of land I am (ideally) given free reign over it within the limits of comon law. Ofcourse the Zoning board would disagree with me but then I'm a bit of a rebel. When I write a story, such as Digital World (published on my website). I can claim a copyright on it. Copyright Alan Grimes 1999 This copyright would last for two years untill it natually expires or I submit it to the copyright office at the Library of Congress where it will remain in my posession for a rediculously long period after my demise. (which I hope never happens but that's a sperate essay). I chose to publish it without a copyright and therefore the story is presently in the public domain. That is it is like the town commons. Owned by nobody but technicaly by the state. Yes I know the idea of a town commons is a bit european. The closest I would say is a centeral park in a city such as the 'mall' in washington DC. (An open grassy area used for special events between the monuments and museums.) The other brand of intellectual property is the patent. The patent is provided for in the constitution. It is administered by the patent and trademark office which is over in arlington. The patent gives an inventor the exclusive right to market his invention for a period of 20 years. Most countries don't allow patents on software. YUCK!!! =P Well what we are discussing here isn't so much a patent or even a copyright issue but rather that of a Trade Secret. We do not care about their coprights or their patents, not even their source code. What we need is the definitive specification (and reprints of the old programmer's kits). Good companies such as Intel will give you manuals and specifications for the asking. I didn't pay a single cent for the DPMI 1.0 manual I was talking about earlier. Its just a spiral-bound printout. =) --- But lets look at my land again. Lets say that there was a mountain range between Columbus and Dayton OH and my property included the only pass through the mountain. Otherwise travelers would have to go hundreds of miles out of their way. If I just decided to sit on it the government would rightfully use "eminent domain" to force me to sell my land so that they could build a road on it for the public interest. This was done many times in the construction of the interstate highway system. This system has also been abused by over-zealous mayors to oust small businesses from properties in favor of special interests, or to create a more politicaly favorable immage for an area when one of the major party's political conventions come to town or a specail media event such as the olympics. Anyway that's a libertarian issue. ( www.lp.org ) --- Lets say I owned my land and, for my own convenience, built and maintained the said road on it. Since the road was so useful I let trafic go through it and enjoy it for twenty years, never closing it. There is a law that I don't fully understand that would declare my property a "public thouroughfare" and I would loose my right to close it. =P Anyway what I am saying is that sometimes there is a public interest that supercedes normal property rights. And even before seeking to nullify Microsoft's interest of any of their products. (which I will insist elsewhere should be more accurately called *services*.) //////// My argument is for the opening of the specification to older windows 'operating systems' to public inspection for the common good. My only desire is for a set of books through which I can engineer 'patches' to my windows 'product' and therefore avoid the neccessity of using later products that are only available at a greater price and under a more restrictive *LICENCE*. (puke). I do not accept Microsoft's services. I want my own software. Linux *SHOULD* kiss my butt, but it doesn't so I don't consider it worth my time. ARGH!! Now that Microsoft's Monopoly position in the marketplace has been recognised by the courts it should now be possible to make an argument based on this fact that since: 1. microsoft D0min8s the market. 2. Computers are vital to commerce. 3. Microsoft's crap is vital to computers, and there is no real alternative due to their domination of the market. =( -- There is a public interest in the function of the windows operating system and therefore a justification for the courts to compel microsoft to lift the veils of trade secrecy from at least their oldest currently viable 'products'. Which means DOS 6.22 and Windows 3.11. I do not wish to deny Microsoft access to its markets or dictate how it should develop tomorrow's products but rather return CHOICE to the marketplace and power to the consumer. That is the power to say NO to restrictive product licencing. When DOS came out it was so simple that competitors succeded in delivering viable alternatives, See DrDos, and other companies such as IBM had the documents that I seek with respect to DOS, and came out with alternatives. See my favorite OS in the world, PC-DOS. =) Microsoft eventually crushed, destroyed, or superceded all these competitors. They even paid out 150million to Caldera for crushing DR-DOS. :) That's now history. Microsoft has apologised for crossing the line but now it must be reigned back into line. These are the digital commons. We must claim them. Either that or pay me $10,000,000 to develop my own insane system. ;) -- People who work on computers use linux; People who work on life use Macintosh =) http://users.erols.com/alangrimes/ <my website. Any usage of this e-mail account is subject to the terms and conditions specified on my website. To unsubscribe, send a message to listar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx with "unsubscribe calmira_tips" in the body. OR visit http://freelists.dhs.org