Posted on 05/24/2007 8:08:29 AM PDT by ShadowAce
First you get everyone riled claiming open source and Linux infringe on your patents, then you won't detail those patents. Why? The paperwork.
Yes, Microsoft cited administrative overhead for not detailing the 235 Microsoft patents its chief legal counsel recently told Forbes exist in Linux and open source.
Microsoft patents attorney Jim Markwith told OSBC it would be "impossible" for Redmond's bureaucrats to respond to the volume of responses that would result form disclosure. Also, apparently, it's ungentlemanly to name names.
"Most people who are familiar with patents know it's not standard operating procedure to list the patents," Markwith said. "The response of that would be administratively impossible to keep up with." Far better to rattle sabers instead.
He spoke up during an Open Source Business Conference (OSBC) panel where Microsoft's director of platform strategy Sam Ramji joined Novell's director of marketing for Linux and open platform solutions Justin Steinman to explain why their controversial sales, marketing, technology and patent agreement is beneficial for open source.
Steinman trotted out names and numbers he claimed proved the agreement is driving adoption of Linux and open source. These included deployment of 40,000 new Suse Linux Enterprise Server (SLES) licenses, a 650 per cent growth in Novell's Linux business in the first quarter, and new customers including Walmart and Nationwide.
On technology, we're talking federation of Active Directory and eDirectory, accessing SharePoint Services from eDirectory, and improving the Xen hypervisor to run Windows Server 2008 on SLES. "You did need this deal," according to Ramji who said mutual support for standards only goes so far.
But back to Forbes, and the part of the companies' deal that stuck in the community's craw - the covenant not to sue.
According to Ramji, the executive tasked with the difficult job of straddling Microsoft's growing support for open source in server and tools, and aggressive and unpredictable statements from management on patents, made a jaw dropping attempt to explain away the Forbes article.
"The reason we disclosed that, is because there was a request for transparency following the Novell deal Iast November. This was a response to that transparency," Ramji said. It was at that point the OSBC audience erupted.
Steinman conceded the Forbes article proved uncomfortable reading for a company flamed by the community over the pact. "We had another round of here we go again... we are pretty confident we can offer the customers coverage [from prosecution]. In the net net, we wish the tone of the article had been different."
But what of that covenant not to sue? Steinman's justification was customers had heard competing claims from Microsoft and Novell over patents in Linux, were uncertain and wanted to make "it go away". "When we look at this, we've been clear there haven not been IP infringements in Linux - period, full stop."
Once again, though, it was clear there exists an uncomfortable difference of opinion between Novell and Microsoft. "As a company that puts $7bn a year into R&D, we have a fiduciary responsibility to our shareholders. We have no desire to litigate - we spend $100m a year defending ourselves against patent lawsuits," Ramji said, staking out Microsoft's position on the fence.
Which raised the question of what will happen to customers of the more successful Red Hat Linux distribution. Seems those customers will be left swinging, awaiting prosecution or Microsoft's licensing representatives to come knocking. Ramji said: "We continue to offer licensing agreements to distributors of specific pieces of software called out in the article. Red Hat is welcome to come to the table, as is any other distributor."
Apart from the agreement itself, it's the lack of publicly available details that has alarmed people and caused concerns over what the deal really means. That could soon come to an end - at least partially - as Novell said it planned to release details with its regulatory filings this month - Novell's filings have been delayed as it adjusts for the impact of options on past financials.
Don't get your hopes up too high, though, as Novell promised to delete information from the filing that it considers too sensitive for public consumption. "We will be publishing the Microsoft agreements as attachments to the 10K by the end of May. There will be redactions in those filings. But the filing will be filed as part of 10K by end of this month," a Novell spokesman said.®
More Microsoft FUD.
Don’t for a moment think Microsoft wouldn’t come after patent infringers..they have an army of lawyers who do just that. MS knows this is an unwinnable case so they are backtracking to save face.
But notice near the bottom:
We continue to offer licensing agreements to distributors of specific pieces of software called out in the article. Red Hat is welcome to come to the table, as is any other distributorThere's the motive we cited all along. They want Linux users to run to their safe-haven partner distributors. FUD-for-profit.
What is it with these guys? Steve Jobs and Bill Gates are this era’s captains of industry? No wonder our culture is in the crapper
IB4GE!
Agreed. However, this article raised an interesting question (at least for me): What happens to the patent deal with Novell if MS does decide to go after someone? Given Novell's position in the article ("When we look at this, we've been clear there have not been IP infringements in Linux - period, full stop."), any legal move by MS would put a serious strain on on this deal, I would think.
Sounds more like Microsoft SCO...
Too busy trying to fix the newest POS alleged operating system that they are using to exploit the stupid.
Since you like to use these foreign sites as your source constantly here’s a different take from that same one:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/01/11/microsoft_wins_patent_case/
Microsoft wins FAT patent case - Could use it as stick to beat Linux
The US Patent Office has upheld Microsoft’s claim of patent rights over its File Allocation Table.
The decision reverses two earlier judgements and potentially allows Microsoft to go after open-source developers who use the technology. FAT controls how computers store information to hard drives and other storage devices such as Flash cards.
The US Patent and Trademark Office ruled that the file system is “novel and non-obvious” and, therefore, deserving of a patent.
The decision is important because it could mean Microsoft could force open-source distributors to pay it a royalty or remove the software from their products. Open-source software must, by definition, be patent-free. Concerns over patents within some Linux distributions have been blamed for hindering wider adoption of the operating system.
Florian Mueller, founder of nosoftwarepatents.com, said the decision gave Microsoft the weapons to attack Linux. Mueller said: “This is now a situation in which Microsoft could cause major problems to Linux vendors and users. Microsoft may not want to do that yet for other considerations, but the USPTO’s decision gives Microsoft the strategic option to do so at a time of its choosing. Also, the USPTO and even the European Patent Office continue to grant new patents to Microsoft daily, and some of them may be equally dangerous to open source as the FAT patents.
“The example of the FAT patents shows that all those patent quality initiatives and patent pledges have no significant value to open-source developers, vendors and users if Microsoft ever wants to go for Linux’s throat.”
Bill Gates is supposedly a good card player. He should have know his bluff would be called. Or maybe Steve Balmer doesn’t tell him everything anymore.
It is SOP to list the CLAIMS that are infringed. What is this? Another SCO extortion?
Who has the BS Meter graphic?
Plus, lawyers only go after deep pockets, and Microsoft qualifies on that count. Open source software does not.
Looks like my prediction the 1st day this story broke was dead on - http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/1833619/posts#32
and
http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/1833619/posts?page=69#69
Blackmail and intimidation, it’s the Microsoft business model ;)
Bill Gates is just pissed off because he doesn’t have all of the money in the world yet...
What Microsoft doesn’t seem to understand is that they’re now a signatory to the UnitedLinux deal - if only through licensing.
I don’t think they read that.
Thing is, though, MS is in trouble.
On the one hand, they prosecute their software patents. They had a record of using them to beat others into submission.
On the other hand, they just won a decision in the Supreme Court that essentially denies software patents.
They can’t have it both ways. What is likely to happen in the future is that any court they bring an argument to is likely to reference the SC decision and tell MS that they cannot have their cake and eat it too - followed by kicking them out.
How about Novell doing the same thing? :-)
I was recently involved in a competitor violating one of my company's patents. We sent them pictures of one of their products opened up with arrows pointing to the offending part and a list of patents they violated.
Too busy to specify the violations, but they weren't to busy to identify and count them? Smells like MS BS to me. No wonder they funded SCO while they were suing: they want to kill Linux and now they've gotten desperate enough get their own fingerprints on it.
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.