Microsoft has succeeded in fracturing the Linux and open-source community with the patent indemnity agreements it has entered into with several prominent vendors, Ubuntu leader and Canonical CEO Mark Shuttleworth told eWEEK. The strategy behind that was to drive a wedge into the open-source community and unsettle the marketplace, Shuttleworth said. He also took issue with the software maker for not disclosing the 235 of its patents it claims are being violated by Linux and other open-source software.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2005-07-09
> Since when is indemnification a bad thing?
Microsoft isn't offering indemnification. It's saying "You're guilty, I'm not telling you the charges or how serious the violation is, or even allow you to remove the offending code or challenge me, but I'll forget about coming down hard on you or your customers. So anyone who doesn't pay me should live in fear."
That isn't legitimate business, this is extortion.
What's more, it's trying to get people to pay Microsoft for code they neither developed nor played any part in. If I went into your back yard and told you "pay me for the privilege of using your property *or else*", you'd more than likely be a little P.O.ed.
Member since:2006-02-05
How is that different from this? http://members.forbes.com/asap/2002/0624/044.html
the whole patent business is far from legitimate. the way that ms is acting is the way that all the major software houses act. linux is now just being treated as an equal instead of ignored.
Member since:2005-09-27
Member since:2007-02-17
That isn't legitimate business, this is extortion.
The really interesting thing is that Microsoft want to tie in the soundbites of "Linux infringes patents" and "interoperability" together with one another. Microsoft want to extract royalty payments from Linux even though Microsoft wrote absolutely none of the code in Linux.
There are not one but two "elephants in the room" on this subject.
(1) Microsoft have no patents that relate to interoperability issues. This is because in order to have a patent on something, you have to disclose on the patent itself how your invention actually works. All of the interoperability issues between Microsoft and Linux arise because Microsoft deliberately obscured protocols and formats that are needed for interoperability ... hence no patents can apply. These are trade secrets at best.
(2) If Microsoft really wanted their customers to be able to have a mixed Linux/Windows environment, and to be able to interoperate, then all that is required is for Microsoft to adhere to open standards. Full ODF compatibility for Office (allow ODF as default format) would be a good start, full W3c compliance http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Wide_Web_Consortium#Standards would really enable viable interoperability and standards such as Open LDAP http://www.openldap.org/ would be a good place to move further.
Edited 2007-08-08 02:12
Member since:2005-07-08
I don't think that anybody here is against interoperability. But that's not what these deals are about. If they were, then Microsoft would sit down with Red Hat and Ubuntu to talk interoperability. For Microsoft, the patent covenant is the piece de resistance of the Linux agreements. Without it, Microsoft doesn't stand to profit from interoperability.
I've previously described these deals as Microsoft's way of welcoming commercial Linux vendors to the smoke-filled room where IT vendors drink brandy and carve out their respective slice of the pie. This is how the big guys play. They elbow and posture their competitors off their turf and top it off with a dominant handshake.
I've previously described these deals as Microsoft's way of hazing the new guy. Why is does the IT industry work like a college fraternity? Should I think that Novell is cooler now that they've been made to screw a goat while Ballmer watched? What's so "revolutionary" about letting the market decide?
I don't want to stick it to the man, and I don't need to either. In the end, it's "the man" that's on the receiving end of the stick. For most non-American businesses, IT is the single biggest expense. America, of course, has a healthcare crisis. The cost of doing business dwarfs the cost of innovation, quality assurance, and customer service. This leads to bankruptcy, consolidation, and inflation.
Interoperability is great. But delivering value is more important. As long as the IT industry is an exclusive club with a velvet rope and a bouncer named Tiny Ballmer, we're all being ripped off for our basic computing needs. Including the man.
Member since:2006-02-05
I don't quite agree. I see the novell deal as the same thing as Office for Mac. It is one of the few instances of MS actually being a "joiner"
I actually wasn't specifically talking about you there. In general, I have found your comments well reasoned, even when I don't agree with them. I was talking about the kind of person who spells microsoft with an $, and who has been the most shocked and outraged over this whole thing.
I have said a million times before, that IMHO the perfect world would be where Linux rules the servers, MS rules the business, and OSX rules the home desktops. This kind of environment would not only play to each OS relative strengths and not force them to be everything to everyone, would mean that one worm could not bring down 80% of the worlds computers, and that there would be incentives for interoperability and standards for everyone.
Member since:2006-04-21
I dunno, I think sometimes that the more vocal segments of the linux community (ie, the ones who post in places like this), only use linux because of deep, vitriolic hatred of microsoft. They don't use linux because they like it, they use it to "stick it to the man". They don't really care if Linux succedes in any way, more that Microsoft fails. This is in stark contrast to most of the people actually doing the work, who simply don't care about microsoft, and don't have any intention of overthrowing evil empires, but are motivated instead by the desire to write good software.
Unlikely. There would be no reason for these hypothetical Microsoft-and-Linux-haters to jump on the Linux bandwagon, or at least not all of them. They would be jumping on other bandwagons (SyllableOS, SkyOS, Haiku, etc.) too.
Linux might be big enough to "soak up the Microsoft haters" NOW, but without a sufficient number of people who actually liked it in the first place, it would never have gotten where it is now anyway - and the Microsoft haters probably jumped ship from MS long ago.
Member since:2005-07-06
I must admit I have a deep distrust of Microsoft and I do use it in part to "stick it to the man". However, I care a great deal if Linux succeeds or not and I am one who hopes Microsoft fails. Also I am motivated by the will to write good software, not everyone fits in a nice little box like that.
Member since:2006-01-19
I also have a deep distrust of Microsoft, simply because Microsoft did not show a single trustworthy action for as long as I know computers (20 years). It was always only about shoving others out of the market, never anything else.
When Microsoft was small this did not have the big negative impact it had for the last decade, but now Microsoft is so big, that even unpolite behaviour (like saying something negative about a company) will damage startups severely.
IBM was in the same situation, and they managed to change their behavior, I am hoping Microsoft will change too. But maybe there has to be an event which clearly shows that the past bullying tactics will not help the company any more, before that happens. Like loosing market share to competing products by the same amount as happened with IE and Firefox.
RE[3]: Good Summary of the situatio
Member since:
2006-02-05
I dunno, I think sometimes that the more vocal segments of the linux community (ie, the ones who post in places like this), only use linux because of deep, vitriolic hatred of microsoft. They don't use linux because they like it, they use it to "stick it to the man". They don't really care if Linux succedes in any way, more that Microsoft fails. This is in stark contrast to most of the people actually doing the work, who simply don't care about microsoft, and don't have any intention of overthrowing evil empires, but are motivated instead by the desire to write good software.
Since when is indemnification a bad thing? In the commercial software world, the big players have been cross-liscencing for years now. The only reason that it hadnt happened in linux years ago is because the user base was too small to register on the radar. The fact that MS is actually treating linux distros in the way that any major software house would treat competition is a Good Thing, and the fact that they have given up trying to sink the whole thing through shady power plays and disinformation campeigns is also a Good Thing (anyone who thinks the whole patent thing is just that, go over to google patents and just look at some of the ideas MS owns. it is more then probable that they have the patents to back up their claims.)
The reality of the situation is that Windows is the monopoly, it is used everywhere, and if you want your product to be taken seriously, you have to be able to interoperate with what is out there. That is exactly what the Novell and Linspire deals were about, the whole indemnification thing was a side issue. If you look at it with even remotely objective frame of mind, you will realize that integration with Active Directory is downright a necessity for many businesses, and interoperability with the latest office formats isn't exactly a bad thing.
Of course, if you use linux because you are a "revolutionary", you wont care about such things in the slightest, and all that is outweighed by the taint that deals with microsoft brings. Thankfully, such peoples opinions don't mean much outside of forums like this one. The people who do matter (ie IBM, Dell, HP, etc) say stuff like this:
“We applaud Novell and Microsoft in their efforts to provide greater Windows and Linux interoperability,” said Paul Otellini, president and chief executive officer of Intel Corporation. “Customers want solutions that meet their individual needs, and higher levels of software interoperability give them the ability to more easily make the best choices.”
“Windows and Linux are extremely important to our enterprise customers and the industry, and AMD strongly supports both,” said Hector Ruiz, chairman and chief executive officer of Advanced Micro Devices. “This agreement by Novell and Microsoft helps customers bridge the gap between these platforms, giving them greater flexibility in doing what works best for them. This is a great example of vendors working together to resolve complexity so their customers don't have to.”
“This technology and business collaboration provides a model that allows Microsoft and Novell to develop new solutions to enable open source and proprietary software to work better together in a mixed-source environment,” said Shane Robison, executive vice president and chief strategy and technology officer at HP. “We applaud these two companies for doing the hard work to build a bridge between Windows and Linux”
“IBM encourages more industry endorsement of mixed-source solutions that promote open standards,” said Steve Mills, senior vice president and group executive at IBM Software. “Microsoft support for interoperability with the industry-standard OpenDocument Format is most welcome. Open documents give customers choice and help unlock broad industry creativity, allowing access to a new generation of innovative applications. Our view continues to be that interoperability and choice are key values that customers demand and deserve.”
“We are pleased to see that Novell and Microsoft have come together to address customer needs with heterogeneous operating environments,” said Kevin Kettler, CTO at Dell Inc. “As an industry leader in the IT market, we are excited to see the technology investments being made around virtualization and interoperability by both companies with this agreement.”
“SAP has been the first enterprise application vendor to run our apps on Linux, while we have more Windows-based deployments than any other platform,” said Shai Agassi, president of Product and Technology at SAP. “Today’s announcement means that customers can now choose their preferred operating system for each part of their SAP implementation with the confidence that the systems will have strong interoperability and be supported by SAP, Novell and Microsoft — both companies being strong SAP partners.”
“One of the key challenges in government is IT interoperability,” said Thomas Jarrett, secretary of the Department of Technology and CIO of the state of Delaware. “We commend Microsoft and Novell for their collaboration and their efforts to build bridges in the interoperability area, which will help government to better serve our customers, our business community and our citizens.”