| ActiveMac | Anonymous | Create a User | Reviews | News | Forums | Advertise |
|
|
|
User Controls |
|
New User |
|
Login |
|
Edit/View My Profile |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ActiveMac |
|
Articles |
|
Forums |
|
Links |
|
News |
|
News Search |
|
Reviews |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
News Centers |
|
Windows/Microsoft |
|
DVD |
|
ActiveHardware |
|
Xbox |
|
MaINTosh |
|
News Search |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ANet Chats |
|
The Lobby |
|
Special Events Room |
|
Developer's Lounge |
|
XBox Chat |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ's |
|
Windows 98/98 SE |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Windows Me |
|
Windows "Whistler" XP |
|
Windows CE |
|
Internet Explorer 6 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Xbox |
|
DirectX |
|
DVD's |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TopTechTips |
|
Registry Tips |
|
Windows 95/98 |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Internet Explorer 4 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Windows NT Tips |
|
Program Tips |
|
Easter Eggs |
|
Hardware |
|
DVD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Latest Reviews |
|
Applications |
|
Microsoft Windows XP Professional |
|
Norton SystemWorks 2002 |
|
|
|
Hardware |
|
Intel Personal Audio Player 3000 |
|
Microsoft Wireless IntelliMouse Explorer |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Site News/Info |
|
About This Site |
|
Affiliates |
|
ANet Forums |
|
Contact Us |
|
Default Home Page |
|
Link To Us |
|
Links |
|
Member Pages |
|
Site Search |
|
Awards |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Credits |
 |
Microsoft invokes non-compete clause | |
|
||
| Time: 09:55 EST/14:55 GMT | News Source: ZDNet | Posted By: Brian Kvalheim | ||
|
A shareware developer and former Microsoft worker is vowing to fight his ex-employer for the right to distribute his home-networking software. Lawyers representing the software giant sent a cease-and-desist letter last week to Esiod Systems, a small, Monroe, Wash.-based software company formed early this year by former Microsoft developers Siddhartha Rao and Caleb Doise. The letter demands that the company halt planned distribution of Schnazzle, an inexpensive shareware application Esiod had planned to begin selling this week. | ||
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 164 Last | Next |
The time now is
5:10:55 PM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
| #1 By 3339 (65.198.47.10) at 6/11/2003 1:28:30 PM |
|
Out of curiosity, becker, what makes MS right this time?
"Microsoft claims that Schnazzle--which allows PCs on a home network to share music, photos and other media--is similar to planned Microsoft technology and therefore violates the non-compete clause of the employment agreements Rao and Doise signed when they began working for Microsoft. The company's standard employment contract prohibits ex-employees from using knowledge they gained at Microsoft to work on competing products for one year after they leave the software giant." "Schnazzle is based on an extremely proprietary protocol we dreamed up," he said. "We created this highly secure, tightly coupled peer-to-peer network, which has nothing to do with what Microsoft is talking about." Doesn't sound like they are using "knowledge they gained at Microsoft." |
| #2 By 3339 (65.198.47.10) at 6/11/2003 1:51:02 PM |
|
Where did I say that?
I'm asking becker what he has heard to suggest the opposite. So far there is about zero evidence of any specific MS knowledge incorporated into their product. On the other hand, they have created their own protocol and know that it isn't the same method used in MS's projects. Distinctly different technology is not even close to someone just "claiming" : "we didn't get the idea from MS." It is evidence. I'm not claiming to know where this will end up, but can you point out any evidence to suggest there is any validity to MS's position, Jagged? If so, please do. They haven't provided any. |
| #3 By 7390 (198.246.16.251) at 6/11/2003 2:31:52 PM |
|
Please correct me if I am wrong.
Doesn't the non-compete say that you can't compete in the same market space? Or does it say that you can't use knowledge gained to compete in the same space? |
| #4 By 3339 (65.198.47.10) at 6/11/2003 2:45:40 PM |
|
It depends how its worded. But usually it does require "taking" specific knowledge from one company and using it as the basis as a competing product.
But this issue has raised the question: is MS suggesting that ex-employees cannot use their skills in ANY (since they can virtually claim being in every) market related to software for a year? If this is the basis for MS's argument, it'll probably be thrown out as the individuals ability to use their skills for gainful employment trumps MS's exposures. Also, numerous MS employees leave to form software companies right away so I would imagine that MS is claiming that this product includes specific technologies that belong to them. |
| #5 By 135 (209.180.28.6) at 6/11/2003 4:07:53 PM |
|
I still don't like non-competes.
Any taking of technology outside of the company would already be covered by copyright or patent law. |
| #6 By 3339 (65.198.47.10) at 6/11/2003 6:44:23 PM |
| So... becker, no evidence? Hmmm? So why would you "say that Microsoft is in the right this time"? |
| #7 By 3653 (209.149.57.116) at 6/11/2003 9:29:10 PM |
|
jerk, why should anyone answer a single question you have. you are close-minded, and dont care about the answer given anyway. just be on your way...
the reality is that you have no more insight into this, than becker does. so, stop antagonizing... and go meet a girl or something. |
| #8 By 1643 (205.240.158.3) at 6/12/2003 1:22:15 AM |
|
I am familiar with the Fjord project, and it is very similar to their software (as described on the web site). Also notice MS-Watch is much more ethical in their reporting...It is interesting that ZDNet forgot to mention all the relevant information. Gasp, why to media companies intentionally spin this...oh yeah! $$$
http://www.microsoft-watch.com/article2/0,4248,1121857,00.asp humor |
| #9 By 3339 (65.198.47.10) at 6/12/2003 2:06:05 PM |
|
please, mooresa, there is nothing that specifically links the two. Yes, MS has Fjord a project to wirelessly stream media files, okay... And Schnazzle uses a completely new, closed, proprietary protocol to do the same thing. They know it's not the same as Fjord. (humor, do you know what MS is using? Is it simply TCP over a 802.11 spec? Is it using UPnP?) Hell, I know you could do Schnazzle without using MS or proprietary protocols but instead open standards. So where is the element of evidence that suggests there is an MS technology in this product?
I asked because I would LOVE to hear the answer! As far as I can tell, there is nothing to support the blind position that MS is in the right. I'm not saying it's definite one way or the other, I just want to know how someone can blindly support MS on this. What is the basis for it, if any? |
| #10 By 1643 (205.240.158.3) at 6/12/2003 8:28:55 PM |
| It is not blind. Remember, they had access to all the internal market research, attended meetings that other people from the company had input on, and basically took all that knowledge (IP) and tried to make their own product. Whatever SJ, your hopeless… |
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 164 Last | Next |
The time now is
5:10:55 PM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
