Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 1st Oct 2010 21:08 UTC
General Development Anyone who did not see this one coming after Microsoft's patent deal with HTC and Apple's meticulousness in avoiding Windows Mobile in its suit against HTC hasn't been paying attention. Microsoft has filed a patent complaint with the US International Trade Commission, as well as a patent lawsuit in the US District Court for the Western District of Washington against Motorola over its Android-based devices.
Thread beginning with comment 443605
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[5]: makes perfect sense
by Fettarme H-Milch on Sun 3rd Oct 2010 12:55 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: makes perfect sense"
Fettarme H-Milch
Member since:
2010-02-16

No. Even if they are supporter of patents, free software (which android is) is incompatible with patents.

No, it's not. Except the BSD/MIT licenses, pretty much every somewhat common FOSS license handles patents in an affirmative way.
They usually say that the distributor of the FOSS code also gives a royalty-free patent license to the receiving parties.
I'm not aware of any FOSS license that prohibits the use of patented techniques.


If they want to pay to microsoft, they might as well stop using android and become Microsoft OEM and slave. If they pay to Microsoft and continue using Android, they should be boycotted until bankruptcy, like Novell. Only way to stop this madness is to show teeth to a bully and boycott those who don't.

Your argument makes no sense.
1.) You seem to only have a problem with Microsoft's involvement. You don't seem to care that Android inventor Google also owns software patents.
2.) If you want to boycott someone, boycott all software patent supporters, incl. Google.
3.) Nobody with relevance boycotts Novell. Despite Novell's open attitude towards sellout (and if I understand reports right, Novell primarily wants to get rid of the Netware branch), the company overall is healthy with cash reserves of IIRC 1 billion US dollar.
Novell is the 2nd largesst Linux distributor after Red Hat and also one of the biggest FOSS contributors.
If you want to boycott Novell, show guts and boycott every line on code that was ever written by Novell. Good luck with that....

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[6]: makes perfect sense
by gnufreex on Mon 4th Oct 2010 02:45 in reply to "RE[5]: makes perfect sense"
gnufreex Member since:
2010-05-06

You obviously misunderstood what I meant. When I said "incompatible with patents", I meant incompatible with paying royalties. I thought it was obvious. That is what Microsoft want. To pay them royalties per copy, for software they didn't make. Free software is incompatible with that, regardless of the license. If Microsoft gets it's way, then software is not free anymore because license is not sufficient to use software. You would have to contact Microsoft for patent license. So that is parasitic, they try to make other people's work proprietary. Microsoft only can do that because they are not involved directly with that software, if they would be distributing free software themselves, they would be giving out patent license with distribution.

for other part:

1) As I descibed above, Google's patents are not problem because Google is distributing Android, and not going around and trolling people in order to extort patent royalties. They couldn't even do that because they have given out irrevocable patent license with every copy of Android. Most of the code in Android is GPL and ASL. Both licenses have patent grant, so Google can't tomorrow turn around and sue.

2) Show me where Google is supporting patents? Patenting something to defend themselves from lawsuits is one thing (and I don't really like that either, but who want to survive patent system has to do it), and supporting softawre patents is completely another thing.

3) You are wrong, lots of people are avoiding everything Novell. You could chose (completely arbitrary) that everyone doing so is irrelevant in your opinion, but I could say that your opinion is irrelevant too. And that is not topic here.

If you want to boycott Novell, show guts and boycott every line on code that was ever written by Novell.


That should mean that you need to boycott like Microsoft want as all to do. It is fallacious. I don't see why should I care who contribute GPL code I am using, since Novell don't get any money from my use of Fedora, Ubuntu or RHEL. What should be avoided to hurt Novell is all flavours of SUSE. And I do so not because somebody will sue me, but because I don't need Microsoft approved Linux, and Novell should get a message that nobody wants Microsoft approved distro. What should be avoided in order to prevet introducing Microsoft MONOculture in Linux, is Mono. And Microsoft also could sue users of Mono when they decide that migration away from Mono is to hard. So double trap.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[7]: makes perfect sense
by lemur2 on Mon 4th Oct 2010 05:03 in reply to "RE[6]: makes perfect sense"
lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

When I said "incompatible with patents", I meant incompatible with paying royalties. I thought it was obvious. That is what Microsoft want. To pay them royalties per copy, for software they didn't make.


Exactly. Spot on. Precisely.

Microsoft want everyone to have to pay them for software. They want both users and producers of software to pay, per copy, for any software at all, even software which Microsoft did not write and do not distribute themselves.

Microsoft want at least for everyone to pay per copy, and preferably to pay per client/user/machine per period of time (i.e. rent), and even better, pay per use.

Reply Parent Score: 2

Fettarme H-Milch Member since:
2010-02-16

You obviously misunderstood what I meant. When I said "incompatible with patents", I meant incompatible with paying royalties.

That is also not true. Software patents hurt FOSS but they are not incompatible with it. See LAME, the FOSS MP3 encoder, it's under LGPL but thrives despite patents.
Patents are a problem of the jurisdiction, not FOSS itself.

Show me where Google is supporting patents?

English is not my mother language but if I understand http://www.openinventionnetwork.com/press_release08_06_07.php correct, Google licensed patents from OIN (=licensee) but does not grand its own patents to OIN (=licensor).

Btw: Novell is a licensor to OIN.

An even better proof would be to publicly create lots of prior art without patenting anything. You can't countersue patent trolls anyway because they don't make any products.

You are wrong, lots of people are avoiding everything Novell. You could chose (completely arbitrary) that everyone doing so is irrelevant in your opinion, but I could say that your opinion is irrelevant too. And that is not topic here.

Once again your comments make no sense. Novell only markets its Linux offerings directly towards enterprises and that branch is growing.
Random readers if the "Boycott Novell, cheer for Red Hat" propaganda hate blog are not enterprise officials.

(openSUSE is sponsored by Novell but not marketed by Novell. The commercial distributor of openSUSE is called open-SLX and is an independent company.)

What should be avoided in order to prevet introducing Microsoft MONOculture in Linux, is Mono. And Microsoft also could sue users of Mono when they decide that migration away from Mono is to hard. So double trap.

Mono isn't even part of the default openSUSE install (don't know about SLES or SLED but considering that Novell sells a separate Mono kit, I guess it's true there as well). It is part of Ubuntu's default, hence Ubuntu does more to promote Mono than Novell.

Reply Parent Score: 2

jabbotts Member since:
2007-09-06

Are the rumors of a SUSE buy-out from Novell still floating around? I thought I'd read that in last weeks' news; Novell in talks regarding selling SUSE/OpenSUSE to someone else.

Your boycott bit did make me giggle though. I'm just trying to imagine the hard-core "world is black or white" folks dropping CUPS (Apple), Samba (Novell) and anything else ever touched by corporate profit motives.

Reply Parent Score: 2

vivainio Member since:
2008-12-26

I'm just trying to imagine the hard-core "world is black or white" folks dropping CUPS (Apple)

I don't think forking (reimplementing) CUPS would be too hard, if anyone cared enough. If that's all it takes to go "Apple-free" (the other one being not using webkit based browsers), it's not a big hindrance.

Samba (Novell) and anything else ever touched by corporate profit motives.

Is Samba in Novell's hands somehow? I didn't know this.

Reply Parent Score: 3