We are the Borg, resistance is futile

"Ouch! How that must have hurt. Admitting defeat to an opponent which is only a single continent, and not a very big one at that. I'd love to have seen the "constipated" look on Balmer's face when the decision was made."

...and the precedent has been set that big government can dictate software design.

Anyone that thinks the EC will stop with Microsoft is kidding themselves.

There's an old saying, "You can't fight city hall." Meaning, when the government tells you to do something, you do it. Microsoft was too arrogant to understand that. Now they've been properly humbled (and are probably better off for it).

This is a backdoor for them to threaten to sue enterprise Linux distributions for providing SAMBA, because it is adapted to MS's perversions of the Open Standards (SMB, Kerberos and LDAP), that has now been suddenly converted into MS's "intellectual property".

The patent licence at a "mere 0.4%" is an affront to the everyone. This is a backdoor for them to threaten to sue enterprise Linux distributions for providing SAMBA, because it is adapted to MS's perversions of the Open Standards (SMB, Kerberos and LDAP), that has now been suddenly converted into MS's "intellectual property". Capitulation to a gang of thieves Ms Kroes.

The patent licence at a "mere 0.4%" is an affront to the everyone. This is a backdoor for them to threaten to sue enterprise Linux distributions for providing SAMBA, because it is adapted to MS's perversions of the Open Standards (SMB, Kerberos and LDAP), that has now been suddenly converted into MS's "intellectual property". Capitulation to a gang of thieves Ms Kroes.

Under the agreement, software developers will only pay a one-time fee of 10,000 euros, or $14,300, to gain access to Microsoft's communications protocols, which specify how to exchange data between Windows and rival products. These protocols are trade secrets, not patents. If competitors want to license Microsoft's patents, they must pay a per-unit royalty of 0.4 percent of the value of the product sold. Microsoft had originally demanded 5.95 percent of sales as royalties.

Edit: I am *so* envious of your avatar. My childhood role model. And today, too, really. Great shot of him!

only a single continent, and not a very big one at that.

Therefore, Linux distributions can distribute Samba for free and pay Microsoft 0.4% of Samba product revenues (which would be $0), and come out of the whole deal revenue neutral and unable to be sued by Microsoft.

Only Novell would have to pay Microsoft ... because Novell charges $$$ for SLED. The trick is this ... what percentage of the cost of SLED is represented by Samba? If we say (somewhat arbitraily I suppose) that Samba is 1% of SLED, the Novell would owe Microsoft .004% of each sale of SLED, I suppose. Not a biggie.

RedHat charge people for the service contract, not for the code (it is just that with redHat, you can't buy one without the other). Canonical distribute Ubuntu for $0 with absolutely no strings attached. You can buy support from Canonical for Ubuntu, or from anyone else for that matter, but you don't have to.

Not that the argument is relevant anyways, but Novell doesn't charge for SLED/SLES any more than Red Hat charges for RHEL, they are both service driven models.

"Saying that "it took an entire continent" suggests that the whole of Europe's population was up in arms over this, when 99.9999999% of them could not care less. (Not to mention that the EU itself doesn't represent "an entire continent" in the first place. ) "

Not if they sued a commercial distribution which does have revenue.