Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 8th Nov 2006 11:24 UTC
Novell and Ximian Microsoft will pay Novell USD 348 million up front, but Novell will return USD 200 million of that amount over five years. The specific numbers came in an a filing to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission made by Novell late Tuesday. "The financial commitments Microsoft is making as part of this agreement are significant," company CEO Ron Hovsepian said in a statement. In related news, Microsoft has denied that its patent deal with Novell is in breach of the GPL or will automatically spread Microsoft's patent protection to other Linux distributions.
Thread beginning with comment 180203
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[6]: Why so hard on Novell?
by Vargol on Wed 8th Nov 2006 22:13 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Why so hard on Novell?"
Vargol
Member since:
2006-02-28

To re-quote your first post "we haven't actually heard of ONE yet that Linux may be violating". I've just shown you that there may be 27 MS ones and quite a few more non MS ones.
What happens if OSRM are right. That means under the terms of the GPL no one can distribute a LInux distro until that code has been removed.


Novell cannot legally unilaterally distribute code licensed under GPL-with-a-section-7 as code under the GPL-without-section-7.

No it can't, but show me anywhere in the Novell MS agreement that states that Novell are going do that. People seem to have it in their head that Novell are going to run around putting MS patented technologies in GPL'd software based on. From the Novell faq...

Q4. With this agreement, will Novell include Microsoft patented code in its contributions to the open source community?

No.


"if Novell distributes any software, GPL'ed or otherwise, that violates MS patents then Novell is protected and anyone who isn't Novell is fair game.".

If MS has got patents in Linux and want to get sue happy, all the Linux distributions are fair game anyway. As it is clearly stated above Novell have no intention of tainting GPL'd software with MS patents.
So your argument then becomes...

"if Novell distributes any non GPL'ed software that violates MS patents then Novell is protected and anyone who isn't Novell is fair game.".

And that is a business as normal patent licence, to give one company making a product an advantage over others making the same product.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[7]: Why so hard on Novell?
by twenex on Wed 8th Nov 2006 22:18 in reply to "RE[6]: Why so hard on Novell?"
twenex Member since:
2006-04-21

To re-quote your first post "we haven't actually heard of ONE yet that Linux may be violating". I've just shown you that there may be 27 MS ones and quite a few more non MS ones.

No, you've shown me that you and someone else think there may be 27 unspecified ones. That isn't showing any of them in the flesh.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[8]: Why so hard on Novell?
by Vargol on Thu 9th Nov 2006 11:31 in reply to "RE[7]: Why so hard on Novell?"
Vargol Member since:
2006-02-28

Then please stop using the word MAY, it implies you have not even heard of the possibility that there are patents being infringed.

I have show that there is a possibility that is true, someone claims to have done a study, and claims that infringing code is there.

To effectively counter my argument you must now prove that study bogus or firm up your claims to something like "we haven't actually heard of any specific patent that Linux is violating" which has a totally different meaning.

Reply Parent Score: 1