Five years on
Posted Sep 30, 2010 16:13 UTC (Thu) by pboddie
In reply to: IBM/TurboHercules can be resolved with license; no need for abolition
Parent article: Red Hat Responds to U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Request for Guidance on Bilski
Instead, TurboHercules lodged a complaint, saying that IBM acts in violation of antitrust law by tying its mainframe hardware to its proprietary z/OS operating system.
Please explain how this is different from a game vendor tying its proprietary game client to its proprietary game services - a situation you regarded as being completely acceptable five years ago.
I'm not arguing against you here, but I'd like to know how you square this particular circle. Or, to adopt your own analogy, to know how IBM isn't entitled to ask that you build your own stadium.
to post comments)