Microsoft and Apple can use them, but only under the terms of the license. In specifying THIS license (rather than, for example BSD), Microsoft is unable to "embrace and extend" the patent-covered IP in a proprietary way. So, a strategy like Kerberos, in which Microsoft made their use of the core specification "secret and proprietary", won't work:
If the do something to the implementation of the covered IP, then they have to release what they did under the terms of the GPL: Source code to anyone who wants it, and offers to comply if/when THEY create changes as well.
And so, Microsoft and Apple are forced to implement proprietary code separately from the patent-covered, GPL-licensed, "eye-pee". The Proprietary software must use the patents in question via *PUBLIC* APIs. If Microsoft wants to change any of that GPL-licensed code (introducing a new function, or changing an old one, then they must make their SOURCE CODE changes available to anyone who asks for them.
It's a huge limitation on Microsoft's traditional strategy of creating "new", secret versions of communications protocols, file formats, and storage schemes to make "competitors non-competitive.
Discussion on:
Message 8 of 1
The best of ZDNet, delivered
ZDNet Newsletters
Get the best of ZDNet delivered straight to your inbox
