Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 7th Nov 2006 22:56 UTC
Novell and Ximian "Often cast as the peacemaker in free software disputes, Bruce Perens is on the warpath. When we caught up with him, he wasn't in a mood to be charitable to Novell. On Friday the Utah company, which markets the SuSE Linux distribution, revealed that it was entering into a partnership with Microsoft. Redmond would pay Novell an undisclosed sum in return for Novell recognizing Microsoft's intellectual property claims. Novell received a 'Covenant' promising that it wouldn't be sued by Microsoft."It's a case of 'Damn the people who write the software'", he told us. "Novell is in a desperate position - it has a smaller share of the market than Debian,"" he told The Register. Update: Novell responds to community's questions: here, here and here. Update 2: Havoc Pennington's take.
Thread beginning with comment 179791
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[5]: But ...
by hal2k1 on Wed 8th Nov 2006 01:51 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: But ... "
hal2k1
Member since:
2005-11-11

//"This is a direct acknowledgement of the possibility of MS patents in some opensource software that isn't even developed at Novell."

Nope, in FAQ, they deny that possibility. And I for one am prepared to give them benefit of the doubt until this thing becomes more public, when either Novell put out concrete facts or other side shows evidence of foul play.//

Agreed that there is no "acknowledgement of the possibility of MS patents in some opensource software".

Don't know about giving Novell the benefit of the doubt, though.

http://linux-blog.org/index.php?/archives/172-Novell-is-Now-the-New...
"What should have happened? Novell should have called for Microsoft to take the club OUTSIDE and include everyone. There are licenses that protect Microsoft's proprietary pieces and intellectual property yet still allows them to share things."

IMO, that is why Novell don't have any benefit of the doubt.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[6]: But ...
by somebody on Wed 8th Nov 2006 02:15 in reply to "RE[5]: But ... "
somebody Member since:
2005-07-07

Don't know about giving Novell the benefit of the doubt, though.

http://linux-blog.org/index.php?/archives/172-Novell-is-Now-the-New.....
"What should have happened? Novell should have called for Microsoft to take the club OUTSIDE and include everyone. There are licenses that protect Microsoft's proprietary pieces and intellectual property yet still allows them to share things."

IMO, that is why Novell don't have any benefit of the doubt.


Blog you mention was written based on the first assumption.

I on the other hand am giving Novell benefit of the doubt, we will know truth very soon anyway.

Now look from the other side. MS is the only one spending cash here. So? Why not take the chance and MS money. If FAQ is true, then they haven't bought anything but food to feed their FUD machine. They would produce FUD anyway, they would spew non-sense anyway. Why wouldn't other party earn money from it?

Nicest example are Linux sites. Which commercials do you see? Microsoft. Go on linuxtoday.com, what do you see? Microsoft. I guess, by your logic they should decline the offer and not earn money. You can't eat idealism, you can't fund linux out of nothing. So, if MS wants to spend cash on it? I say welcome. I will gladly ignore their Server commercial on linuxtoday.com so they keep the site up for me to read it.

Update:
As I said we will now it soon, now Groklaw posted article about their SEC filling.
http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20061107194320461

Although I plan to wait for more opinions than Groklaw on this one. They were too biased in the first one.

Edited 2006-11-08 02:27

Reply Parent Score: 1