Linux is a copy of UNIX in a more legitimate way. UNIX is a published specification (actually a set of them, depends on how you define "UNIX"), free for anyone to implement. Microsoft even implemented POSIX in NT, as do most operating systems, at least partially.
What'll really burn you is that the official name, POSIX, was coined by Stallman.
Nor are there employees working at Apple giving their code to Microsoft to use in Vista
No, but if Apple wanted to let them it would be fine with me. It's their code, their right.
China based their "Red Flag" software on a direct copy of "Red Hat" which is based in North Carolina.
With Red Hat's permission. Of course, what gave the Chinese the right to do that is also the only reason that the Red Hat corporation exists in the first place. Would you rather those American jobs not exist?
Microsoft doesn't have a history of aggressively suing others, but I would think this would be an appropriate moment from their perspective, would you not?
They're getting desperate. But they'd better be careful because, as you said, IBM likes to enforce its patents. A patent suit against any Linux vendor risks IBM pulling out the likely thousands of patents that could cover Microsoft products.
And as far as open source only copying, then why is there a project for open source as prior art? I followed one example of invalidating a software patent, and it referenced numerous examples of open source software as prior art.
Hero worship.
With Red Hat's permission.
I'm sure Loral's decision to give the Chinese the engineering expertise to build ICBM's was perfectly fine with you too.
They're getting desperate. But they'd better be careful because, as you said, IBM likes to enforce its patents.
IBM has a cross patent license agreement with Microsoft, Sun too. The end result of this will be more cross license agreements as well, patents are here to stay and if Stallman wants to distribute software he'll have to face the same liabilities as everyone else.