Microsoft has said it will not sue Linux users with regards to the company's patent claims. "We're not litigating. If we wanted to we would have done so years ago," said Horacio Gutierrez, Microsoft's VP for intellectual property and licensing, in an interview. When asked for a reply regarding the claim of Microsoft that the Linux kernel infringes 42 of its patents, Linus Torvalds replied: "Can you get a list of which ones? Before that, it's just FUD, and there's not a whole lot I can say or do. Is there prior art? Are they trivial and obvious to one skilled in the art? Would we need to work around them? We don't know, because all I've heard so far is just FUD. If MS actually wanted us to not infringe their patents, they'd tell us. Since they don't, that must mean that they actually prefer the FUD."
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2005-08-18
"It's very difficult for any of us to make the assessment that there's no basis to Microsoft's claims"
On the contrary, it's actually very easy for us to make that assessment. The burden of proof is not on the accused but on the accuser. If you accuse me of something but *refuse* to provide evidence then you are full of it. At least that's a reasonable stance to take until such a time that you DO provide said evidence. How could I defend myself against your accusation if I don't know what it is exactly that I have supposedly done?
Member since:2005-12-15
Member since:2006-01-06
Member since:2007-02-17
{Microsoft is up to something, without any doubt. Litigation is not the only means of achieving a goal.}
Yes it is. Without litigation, without proof, Microsoft are purely and simply just attempting extortion.
http://davedargo.blogspot.com/2007/05/chief-of-licensing.html
http://www.osnews.com/permalink.php?news_id=17917&comment_id=240593
Member since:2005-08-18
Member since:2007-05-02
Member since:2005-08-28
Except we DO have evidence that Microsoft is operating on a fear basis now: They've published and widely publicized that Linux (and X and KDE and Gnome and...) infringe on their patents, but:
a.) They refuse to say what the claims actually are
b.) They refuse to press charges
c.) They continue to widely broadcast these claims
No proof has been offered. (That does not mean they DON'T have proof)
They are either unwilling (or, possibly, unable) to start legal action on what are claimed to be very serious charges.
This leads me to believe that Microsoft's intent is one of five things:
1.) Use the claims themselves to scare people away from Linux
2.) Capture some legal high ground by getting Linux to fire the first shot
3.) Get Novell-style agreements so they can get a piece of the Linux pie
4.) Settlements
5.) Incompetence
Edited 2007-05-16 21:01
Member since:
2005-12-15
It's very difficult for any of us to make the assessment that there's no basis to Microsoft's claims. It's very easy and premature for many of us to just stamp our feet and cry "FUD" at the top of our lungs. We don't have the information to do this.
The reality as I see it, is to watch this space. It'd be a rather blinded perspective to expect Microsoft to do nothing about the infringments they believe exist. Microsoft always has reasons for their actions, and this is no different.
It's also rather rediculous to cast Fortune magazine, of all forms of publications that exist, as so silly to just fall for something, as though they are so daft.
Microsoft is up to something, without any doubt. Litigation is not the only means of achieving a goal.