tim bray has some things to consider about those released ibm patents

But what does it mean?
How were these selected?

well, the last one didn't get an answer yet ...

how to patent an operator (via chris)

what's next: basic arithmetic operations? take the phonebook and call everyone who developed software for paying a fee? nope, as the register pointed out there exists another pattern to follow: ibm. remember the ibm's story of the 80s? antitrust then and now.

So it's in Microsoft's long-term strategic interests to make writing GPL software and using it illegal. Microsoft has already indicated that it can build up its IP patent stream without opening fire. In an interview published last week, Microsoft's director of licensing David Kaefer noted that Microsoft could no longer "look the other way" when companies used its IP, [here] But Kaefer also "... noted that [Marshall] Phelps built IBM's intellectual property business without filing a single lawsuit." [our emphasis] Phelps is the IBM attorney who built up its patent revenues from zero to a billion dollar business in the 1980s. He joined Microsoft last summer.(the register)

i hope they are using this in europe as a showcase for what they mean, when they talk about software patents. not that there would be a need for further proof that it is all about cross-licensing deals ...

i will miss most of it, but they have streaming. who wants to hear toni negri, he is on at 8pm.