The Open-Source debate...continued...
I was reading a post today regarding whether or not the community could trust us (Microsoft) in regards to the rapport framework.
A very well written article, it struck many points that I had not considered as of yet and that will be quite useful in the days to come.
The topic of Open-Source was flitting about in the comments and the thing that occurred to me (*again*) is that if the software that we produce here wasn't worth the money to pay for, nobody would be buying it. The fact that Microsoft protects its investments with patented work, much in the same way that any business would, should not surprise.
So I'm going to guess then, that the main complaint is that software shouldn't be able to be patented. I'll await replies to see if I've really missed the mark here, but in closing I'll say that to change the rules after the patents have been issued is a bit untowards. At what point then would all patentable items be up for the same danger?