MS-DOS Royalty Law???

[Joe]

I am thinking about writing a 100 % DOS compatible OS, but I am unsure if when I start selling it Microsoft(Big Brother) will have the right to put an end to me???, and If I can do that would I be able to bundle DOS with my OS???

-thx

[bubach]

I don´t think that´s a problem becasue Microsoft stoal DOS from IBM. And we already have FreeDOS.

[carbonBased]

Microsoft didn't _steal_ DOS from anyone.  The purchased the rights... and not from IBM either, but from Seattle Computer in the 80's... AKA 86-DOS, or QDOS.

How could Microsoft steal DOS from IBM?  IBM commissioned Microsoft to create an OS for them in the first place!

Besides, if credit's due anywhere, it's to Gary Kildall... ever heard of CP/M?

Not to suggest that Microsoft doesn't steal things, but... hey... we're OS developers... we should prob'ly know the real history behind it all

Cheers,
Jeff

[bubach]

Ok, so i didn´t have all the facts but...
Bill Gates was working at IBM and developed the ibm dos version, and then he quit to start his own comapany Microsoft and started working on MS-DOS..
I tought that mean he stoal dos, but i didn´t know about things like AKA 86-DOS, or QDOS.

/ Christoffer

[bubach]

about this line:
"How could Microsoft steal DOS from IBM?  IBM commissioned Microsoft to create an OS for them in the first place!"

thats not right! ever heard of PC-DOS?? thats ibm´s dos version (i explained that in my previus post...)

/ Christoffer

[carbonBased]

It's still right... Microsoft bought the rights to 86-DOS so that it could produce PC-DOS _for_ IBM.  MS had a contract with IBM to produce an operating system for "their" hardware... so came PC-DOS.  It says IBM, but it was written/adapted by Microsoft... and is basically 86-DOS.

Back in the day, IBM never touched software.  Microsoft was _the_ software manufacturer (for x86)... even if it was just bootable BASIC

Later, MS and IBM would join hands again to produce OS/2, which MS then left, giving rise to NT (which, if you look around in the system, is built almost entirely on OS/2).

Cheers,
Jeff

[Moose]

I heard that the contract arranged between IBM and MS was incorrect and allowed MS to walk away with DOS.

And DirectX, the graphics library, was orginally developed by a company called rendermorphics, which by the way got taken-over by MS.

And, the GUI concept of Windows was stolen from Apple, in 1984 i believe, Apple complained but was told to no because the GUI concept was the future, and i've heard a while back, MS took Lindows to trial for the copyright infringement of the word Windows even though hundreds if not thousands of people/businesses refer to that word every day, both in reference to MS and as a GUI.

I bet Bill wins at the board game "Monopoly" every time he plays .

Moose.

[Chase]

The only thing I know that MS does with regards to this it that they want money for electronics that come with flash/sd cards with Fat filesystems. They might be able to use their patents to come after you, you'll have to read them.
http://www.microsoft.com/mscorp/ip/tech/fat.asp

You could always ask the http://www.freedos.org people if they've had any problems too.

-Chase

[carbonBased]

: I heard that the contract arranged between IBM and MS was incorrect and
: allowed MS to walk away with DOS.

Quite possibly.  As would've been the case with OS/2, as well.

: And DirectX, the graphics library, was orginally developed by a company
: called rendermorphics, which by the way got taken-over by MS.

Indeed.  There's a crap-load of small companies that have been taken over by MS.  Although... at the same time, this is pretty much common practice with any large companies.  WordPerfect and Corel, Lotus and IBM, etc, etc... it's the way of "the new world"

: And, the GUI concept of Windows was stolen from Apple, in 1984 i believe

And Apple took it from Xerox, years before that.  Xerox invented the modern interface, as we know it; GUI and mouse.  Apple adapted it, as did MS.

I'd be more inclined to say that MS got most of their inspiration from NeXTSTEP (the OS that was developed as a result of Steve Jobs leaving Apple)... take a look at Win95, and NeXT... they're surprisingly similar, to me.  Granted, NeXT looks much, MUCH, better... but the styling cues are similar.

: Apple complained but was told to no because the GUI concept was the future

I like Apple, but they complain about everything.  They also had issue with Win95's "recycle bin" as it was a direct rip of their "trash can."  Which is why every OS has a different name for it, btw... OS/2 has the shredder

But, like I said, Apple really had no leg to stand on; they didn't develop the GUI, they just made their own.  If anyone were to sue, it should be Xerox, but that would defeat the entire purpose of innovation

Software patents, and copyrights are rediculous.

: and i've heard a while back, MS took Lindows to trial for the copyright
: infringement of the word Windows even though hundreds if not thousands of
: people/businesses refer to that word every day, both in reference to MS and
: as a GUI.

Yep... and building materials   Leave it to Microsoft to think they can take ownership of _word_!

: I bet Bill wins at the board game "Monopoly" every time he plays .

Prob'ly... but he's not doin' so well lately   Besides, he's no longer CEO of Microsoft, anyway... but Balmer's just as bad

Cheers,
Jeff

[bubach]

Or you could just wait until someone suid you and then go underground..

/ Christoffer

[carbonBased]

You'd, no doubt, be in the clear, though.

Linux has supported many MS file systems for years without issue.  And both QNX and BeOS supported (v)fat.

Course, that's not to say they _can't_ come after you... I just don't think they will.

Cheers,
Jeff

[Moose]

Yeah but if ms were to take linux to trial, they wouldn't have a case anyway. Because the development of linux doesnt come from a business or single person.
There would be no one to come after.

If joe writes an os and lables it as his, then ms could come after him because they have a specific target who they know made that os.

Moose.

[carbonBased]

That wont stand up in court too well   _Someone_ wrote the (V)FAT drivers for Linux... their names are in the source files.  Linux developers can't evade the law by hiding behind the internet.

Suffice to say, if they wanted to, I'm sure MS could say something about it.  However, it's not like anyone's claiming they wrote FAT, nor would any of us be making money off it, so I doubt anything's ever going to be said/done.

In any event, Linux aside, QNX is (and Be was) fully incorporated companies that had FAT drivers.

Cheers,
Jeff

[joe]

Thanks everyone for your input, I now have a better idea of what they could do to me, lol

- peace out

[ASHLEY4]

The patent for fat file, ran out its over 20 years, its only the up dates that they can get you on (eg: how they got more than 8.3 letters in file and dir LFN).

ASHLEY4.