Posted on 08/04/2004 8:28:07 PM PDT by GeorgiaFreeper
The city Munich have their consider project LiMux , which plan, the city administration on Linux change over, on ice put. The German Federal Government, that occurs in the European Union for the disputed software patents and thus against open SOURCE often commodity and the middle class, is jointly responsible is called it in a report SWM software marketing GmbH.
In the evening of yesterday the highest EDP responsible person of the city communicated Munich, Wihelm Hoegner, on a mailing list that could not for the time being start the advertisement of the "LiMux cousin Client" planned for at the end of July, continues to be called it in the report. The city administration must analyze the legal and financial risks after a reference of the Greens first, so the reason.
Software patents are considered as largest danger for the employment and the advancement of Linux and other suitor software. Alone the "Basisclient" from the feasibility study of the city Munich, for which in this or similar form on the computers by 14.000 coworkers is to be installed, stands after a first search (as pdf ) in the conflict too over 50 European software patents. Each individual such patent could cause the loss of the entire city administration. "the decision of the city Munich should all alarm sirens in the Federal Government schrillen to leave. The Federal Ministry of the Interior recommends to all public administrations transferred to Linux, and the Federal Department of Justice makes the whole a wrong decision, which can cost billions of euro ", commentated Florian Mueller, Berater of the open SOURCE manufacturer MySQL, the current development in Munich.
Sounds like they need some of that Linux insurance like the people running Groklaw are selling.
Last week we reported that MySQL advisor Florian Mueller warned that the plans to introduce 14,000 base clients could be in jeopardy because the city's CIO feared the consequences of the EU software patent directives.
And according to today's c't magazine, that's what's happened.
A local Green Party alderman filed a motion in the city last week asking the federal German government to urgently investigate the implications of the EU patent rulings.
They probably could not afford the $150K...
According to the EU - Germany's economy is now better than Arkansas'!
If our American "POOR" lived in Europe they would be listed in the TOP TEN PERCENT of the continents wealthiest people!
That was too many maybes :( I am to tired to type correctly.
> Sounds like they need some of that Linux insurance
> like the people running Groklaw are selling.
groklaw.net is just a Linux legal news blog/bbs.
It doesn't sell, nor necessarily endorse, the IP
indemnification offers available from various
parties.
Any end-user concerned about IP issue in Linux needs
to ask themselves the very same questions about any
proprietary products bid.
On the IP front, what distinguishes Linux is that any
IP problems are easier to spot, which might actually
make it less, not more, likely that Linux will be
affected by patents (submarine or otherwise).
Microsoft has been sued, successfully, and for big
bucks, several times for misappropriating the work
of others (Stac, etc). Does MS indemnify end users?
To borrow a saying from elsewhere, if you can see it, you can hit it. Or, in other words, if you know what your competitor is doing, it makes it easier to write a patent claim to cover it (presuming you have an appropriate patent application pending). I would regard the open source as making it more vulnerable to attack IF there is someone who is willing to take the time to attack with patents.
patent
I believe the proper description is the site owner/moderator is employed by this insurance firm as a "director", and the firm also contributes directly to sister site "grokline".
>> groklaw.net is just a Linux legal news blog/bbs.
> I believe the proper description is the site
> owner/moderator is employed by this insurance firm
> as a "director", ...
Which insurance firm? I don't see any obvious links
on the GL site, nor do I recall seeing any promotion
of such insurance (I do recall seeing discussion about
whether such insurance is necessary or even wise).
> ... and the firm also contributes directly to sister
> site "grokline".
Grokline and Grokdoc are just documentation projects,
as far I can tell.
Apparently. I didn't have to pay a dime out of the half billion they had to give to Eolas. How will the Linux companies pay Eolas I wonder?
If you follow the PDF link from the German article, they appear to list some of the potential violations: GIMP, Mozilla - tabbed browsing, XML Dataformat to name a few. I am not fluent in German, but you can get the gist of several of the patents. Like the XML-Datenaustauschformate, JPEG-Kompression: Kodiersystem zur Reduktion von Redundanz EP026604915, and Multitasking: mehrere Programme werden gleichzeitig ausgeführt.
EP0644483.
>> Does MS indemnify end users?
> Apparently.
More likely, the offended party didn't go after end users.
As I understand it, it's actually not that easy to go
after end users in IP cases (something that Linux worry-
warts need to consider).
> I didn't have to pay a dime out of the half billion
> they had to give to Eolas.
Not yet, anyway. But if you've bought an MS product,
you've helped pay for Stac and other older cases.
> How will the Linux companies pay Eolas I wonder?
and deal with patent issues generally. That is the
emerging issue resulting from software patents.
We've already had one go-round (LZW/GIF), and if
the next one isn't Eolas, it will be FAT32 or
something else.
I consider the notion of software patents to be a
mistake. It permits patenting of concepts, and could
lead to an era of IP feudalism, where the only winners
are IP aggregators and, or course, their lawyers.
>> Which insurance firm?
> OSRM, they employ "PJ" from Groklaw, Bruce Perens,
> and other Linux advocates and attorneys.
I agree that the GL site needs an "About" page that
explains this.
I have no problem with news/discussion sites that
have an explicit bias (such as FR), as long as they
make it obvious in some way (as the NYT does not).
Since almost every GL article starts with a PJ
editorial, the site's position is pretty apparent,
but it could still benefit from a mission statement.
There's no easy way to explain it. Groklaw has been touting for about a year there's no legal problems with Linux, now it turns out the owner is involved in this new insurance plan to suddenly scare everyone into buying this Linux insurance to protect them from legal problems. The kicker? $150,0000 per policy.
I ignore you for the same reason.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.