It appears from the article Microsoft is asserting that some interpretations which would be disfavorable to Microsoft have broader implications if applied uniformly across the spectrum of ICT goods and services.

The author wants to draw a distinction between software and hardware under the law without supplying evidence that such a distinction is made within it, e.g. his claim about GSM being acceptable is based on "nobody suggesting."

The author appears to have an ax to grind, democratic processes be damned.