And so the story regarding Android supposedly violating the GPL continues. Linus Torvalds has responded to the story in his usual straightforward manner – he thinks it’s “totally bogus”. In the meantime, Groklaw – not exactly my favourite place but alas, good points are good points – found out that the IP lawyer who started this story, Edward Naughton, used to be a lawyer for Microsoft in dozens of cases, a fact he tried to erase from his online resume.
We’ve already covered the details of this case yesterday, so I suggest you go and read that if you’re not yet familiar with what’s going on. Brian Proffitt – the guy with the most awesome last name ever – asked Torvalds what he thought about all of this, and as usual, Torvalds’ answer was characteristically straightforward. Quoted in full for the full effect.
It seems totally bogus. We’ve always made it very clear that the kernel system call interfaces do not in any way result in a derived work as per the GPL, and the kernel details are exported through the kernel headers to all the normal glibc interfaces too. The kernel headers contain various definitions for the interfaces to user space, and we even actively try to make sure that the headers can be used by user space (and try to mark which of the headers are expected to be usable in such a way). Exactly because we know user space needs those details in order to interact with the kernel.So I haven’t looked at exactly what Google does with the kernel headers, but I can’t see that they’d want to do anything fundamentally different from glibc in this respect.
Of course, we do have our own ‘internal’ headers too, and we have stuff that is meant to be relevant only for the kernel. But there would be no point for Google to even use those, since they are useless outside of the kernel, so I don’t see what the whole brouhaha would be all about. Except if it’s somebody politically motivated (or motivated by some need of attention). If it’s some desperate cry for attention by somebody, I just wish those people would release their own sex tapes or something, rather than drag the Linux kernel into their sordid world.
Well, that’s pretty conclusive, but hardly surprising. It doesn’t take a genius to figure out that what Google has done isn’t anything to get excited about, since it’s already been done before. Still, it makes you wonder – why bring it up? Well, while it could be merely a coincidence, Groklaw has discovered that Edward Naughton, whose research paper started this thing, used to be a lawyer for Microsoft in dozens of cases – a fact he is now trying to hide from his resume.
Instances of ‘Microsoft’ were replaced by “a Fortune 50 software company” as recently as this month; Google Cache for March 8 still states ‘Microsoft’, which is only a few days before his research paper hit.
I wouldn’t have thought much of it – but the fact that he changed Microsoft to a Fortune 50 software company right before his research paper hit the web is very suspicious, to say the least. It seems like the anti-Android FUD-machine is firing on all cylinders.
Oh yeah, this story was a bit too boring, lets play six degrees from Microsoft, now that will make people sit up and pay attention.
Either go full conspiracy theory site and say “Microsoft is doing this” or stop dropping random factoids to try to drive traffic.
Then why did the guy try and hide that he’d worked for Microsoft? It’s there in black and white, and in the cache. You might want to believe it’s all black helicopters but I’m afraid it isn’t.
The penny might well have dropped within Microsoft circles that Android is now firmly entrenched as the complete world outside the iPhone, kept in place via it’s installed app base that is now really accelerating. Nokia is going to do little, if anything, to change that state of affairs.
Someone doesn’t seem to be keen on Android being used, but alas, it’s going to take something more substantial than this pathetic attempt.
If osnews would have made that argument themselves then fine, it would bring them into conspiracy theories but at least it is intellectually honest. As it stands now however they are just dropping a random factoid in to make their readers imagine things while maintaining deniability. Which is what I find very annoying about this kind of reporting.
Where do I start?
Firstly learn how decimal numbers work. Six is a bigger number than zero (or one if you were to be generous).
After that learn the definition for the phrase “degree of separation” as an employee for Microsoft doesn’t really have a degree of separation from Microsoft as a company is made up of it’s people.
Finally after that you might be able to tackle the difference between logical reasoning based on evidence and conspiracy theories. Although that’s a big “might”.
Look forward to hearing from you in a few years. Best of luck.
Hey, I don’t have to call it a conspiracy theory if you prefer, as long as osnews is honest enough to actually say what they mean themselves rather than implying things. An equally valid interpretation is that Microsoft requested not to be listed in his CV since they didn’t want to be associated with the current stupidity.
Overall I have very little interest in the actual news story personally, but as a long-time reader of osnews I do want to point it out when I see what I consider poor journalistic practice.
Other than that, six degrees of separation is a well known concept, and the guy has never been directly employed by Microsoft, he works at Brown Rudnick.
IANAL, but I fail to see how a firm could stipulate any form of work agreement that would require the employee or consultant or whatever to withhold prior work in his CV.
But the prior work situation regarding Edward Naughton seems to be between two firms.
Here’s a quote from groklaw:
YES, Edward Naughton was never directly employed by Microsoft, but he do seem to have represented MS through Brown Rudnick.
Your a double standard. You accuse the author of “implying things” while also suggesting “an equally valid interpretation” is also possible “WHERE” your “equally valid interpretation” falls into the same “implied things” in which you are the accuser. Which means you will do also what the author have done: “implying things” and your version is favorable to Microsoft.
Please prove me wrong. I mean, you are suggesting that the author must also do the exact opposite of his opinion by implying that it is possible for Microsoft to ask the lawyer to remove the name Microsoft on his bio. But alas, this is “his” bio, and he must be free enough to quote any company he associated with in the past. I think it is possible for MS to do that “request” but with the recent events, if you were right in your “equally valid interpretation” then it is close to a “conspiracy theory” to scare Android device manufacturers.
You are misreading my post and trying to rope me into the debate that I don’t really care much about. I have no interest in the correctness of the first idea everyone jumped to, but which osnews is too cowardly to state themselves, is incorrect or not. There may exist other ways to read the facts, but the possibilities and probabilities are not what is important.
If anything, if this is indicative of Microsoft involvement with any great probability all the more reason for osnews to say what they mean rather than employ cheap tabloid tactics.
If you’re going to claim that you’re being even reasonably objective here, I suggest you avoid the use of loaded words like “cowardly”. I’ll direct you to Robert Thouless’s excellent “Straight and Crooked Thinking” for a primer on how to debate in an objective fashion.
Don’t get me wrong, I can’t imagine this infringement has any legs. However, to call Linus’s quote as “conclusive” is a bit of a stretch. I suppose at best it concludes that if headers are used as he *expects* them to, all is good. But he hasn’t seen the details, and he admits as much.
Linus wrote the original Linux kernel. Since 1993 he has included clear text about this very topic in the license for his code:
http://www.osnews.com/permalink?467331
This whole episode is about Android’s Bionic, a glibc alternative. This work is *not* a kernel itself, it is merely a program that uses kernel services by normal system calls.
QED. Case closed. Move on people, nothing to see here.
This whole topic is over rated and boring now. Lets move onto a new iPhone app or smth..
So wait one second, does it make his accusations any less credible because he has been involved with MS (and is probably trying to hide it)?
All this proves is that he has a clear motive but it doesn’t make him wrong.
Torvalds is probably right and this is probably a waste of peoples time, however your arguments are flawed as usual.
I didn’t claim as such. I only said it makes his claims suspicious.
Nice.
His claims are suspicious because he decided to hide the fact that his clients included MS. Even if he’s investigations were politically motivated, the results need not be.
No, but since every piece of evidence seems to point to him being wrong, trying to hide his previous involvement with MS suddenly becomes interesting.
If you are into soap operas, that is.
Hi,
Edward Naughton, used to be a lawyer for Microsoft in dozens of cases, a fact he tried to erase from his online resume
Did he try to hide the fact that he’s a lawyer, or try to hide the fact that he did some work for Microsoft?
Most sane people would try to do both… 🙂
– Brendan
“I’m going to fucking kill Google”
Steve “Monkey Boy” Ballmer, 2005
http://www.google.com/search?q=%22I%27m%20going%20t…
Edited 2011-03-23 00:29 UTC
http://www.zdnet.com/blog/open-source/microsoft-vs-android/8529?utm…
“This is just one more step in a patent war that’s going–to spread throughout the IT industry. It will be years before it reaches maximum intensity, and years more before the fire begins to die down. Most of this decade will be spent in the fight, which will reduce innovation, destroy tens of billions of dollars in value, and offer a field day to certain non-US competitors. We warned people years ago about this, and now the Free World will be hurt, as everyone will be hurt, by the patent wars resulting from the companies’ incautious embrace of state-issued monopolies on ideas.”
There are a great many people totally comitted to stopping Microsoft from being able to collect rent from software which Microsoft didn’t write.
The five patents at issue in Microsoft’s latest attack against free software are weak enough to possibly make that particular case a reasonable point at which to make a stand. It depends if Barnes & Noble and the others are willing to stand up to Microsoft’s ludicrous demands, or if Microsoft offer them a deal to just roll over as HTC did.
After all, Microsoft paid Nokia in order to get Nokia to use WP7. Microsoft probably also offered to help HTC make Apple go away. It is all about Microsoft trying to build a PR case that “free software isn’t free”. This is a difficult sell for Microsoft because such a stand obviously helps no-one, is very very bad for the economy, and is clearly anti-innovation, anti-competition and anti-trust.
Edited 2011-03-23 01:17 UTC
As a non-US citizen I say “awesome”.
The “Free World” is much larger than the U.S though and most of isn’t all that affected by your in-fighting.
Also. quoting Steven Vaughan-Nichols? Uh….