Microsoft 2006 Research Paper

PAGES
2
WORDS
559
Cite

Microsoft and their Battle with FOSS Microsoft and Their Legal Battles with Free and Open Source (FOSS)

In 2006, Microsoft mounted a major offensive against open source software providers, claiming copyright infringement of 235 different patents. Later in the year, Microsoft entered into an agreement with Novell to ensure both would avert costly litigation over open source patents. Microsoft believed that they would quickly attain legal victory over the Free and Open Source (FOSS) patents given the depth and breadth of legal talent and precedents they had in their favor (McGhee, 2007). In reality this litigation only served to galvanize the open source community, creating a powerful catalyst for competing against Microsoft and what many viewed as monopolistic behavior (Miller, Voas, Costello, 2010).

The key questions surrounding the exponential growth of the Free and Open Source Software (FOSS) platform...

...

FOSS survived however and is today thriving with the majority of servers running Internet e-commerce websites running Linux and various other open source platforms (Miller, Voas, Costello, 2010). Ironically FOSS has also has never been more popular from an economics standpoint as well. The Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) is making FOSS one of the most popular operating systems globally today, as the pricing on these system sis a fraction of Microsoft's (Miller, Voas, Costello, 2010). With the growing adoption of smartphones and tablet PCs including the iPad which runs a variation of an open source application, the future looks to favor FOSS over proprietary operating…

Sources Used in Documents:

References

McGhee, D.D. (2007). Free and open source software licenses: Benefits, risks, and steps toward ensuring compliance. Intellectual Property & Technology Law Journal, 19(11), 5-0_1.

Miller, K.W., Voas, J., & Costello, T. (2010). Free and open source software. IT Professional Magazine, 12(6), 14-16.

Wormser, D.A. (2010). Open-source software: The value of "free." Intellectual Property & Technology Law Journal, 22(5), 22-0_1.


Cite this Document:

"Microsoft 2006" (2012, April 23) Retrieved April 24, 2024, from
https://www.paperdue.com/essay/microsoft-2006-56443

"Microsoft 2006" 23 April 2012. Web.24 April. 2024. <
https://www.paperdue.com/essay/microsoft-2006-56443>

"Microsoft 2006", 23 April 2012, Accessed.24 April. 2024,
https://www.paperdue.com/essay/microsoft-2006-56443

Related Documents

Microsoft Management The Four Functions of Management at Microsoft The ability of any organization to stay agile and responsive to market conditions is in large part determined by how balanced their management structure is, and how effective their management practices are. At Microsoft the four functions of management are used to create a scalable foundation of future market growth while aligning their internal resources to each opportunity. The intent of this analysis

Microsoft Change Implications for Leadership and Management in Designing and Controlling Innovation and Change: The Microsoft Case No organization can hope to remain competitive today without carefully and efficiently managing the pace of innovation within that organization in response to changing consumer needs, industry trends, and internal capabilities. Communications technologies and other new mechanisms of conducting and creating business that have come about in the Digital Age have increased the pace of

Microsoft Vista Physical vs. Digital Products -- Physical products are those that can be touched, felt, have physical presence, must be produced, warehoused, packaged, shipped and purchased. However, physical products are most certainly not limited to brick and mortar stores. The Internet has opened up an entirely new world for commerce online -- in both physical and virtual worlds with e-Commerce. E-Commerce is the buying and selling of products and services

Microsoft is a company that was found to be in violation of antitrust laws by both the U.S. Justice Department and the European Commissions. The reason behind such a finding, is that Microsoft acted in a manner that was found to be overly aggressive in regards to its operating systems and software. As the Weil and McMillan article wrote that it was "alleged that Microsoft harmed Netscape's browser business through

Microsoft Anti-Trust Case Microsoft was charged with using its position as an industry leader in computer software to force buyers to buy products that were bundled with Internet Explorer. The claim was considered a breach of anti-trust laws which declared that a company cannot package two products together based on one's popularity or market position with the consumer (U.S. v. Microsoft, 2002-2006). Microsoft has denied such claims that they took an

Further diversification is also recommended. Given the pace of change in the industry, the reliance on PC operating platforms and office software packages must be reduced. The risk of an entirely new technological paradigm emerging is high, so Microsoft must therefore diversify its revenue streams in order to defend against this threat. Overall, Microsoft's strategic thrust is strong and its operating results fantastic. The company must guard against major