Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Ballmer: Linux users owe Microsoft
ComputerWorld ^ | November 16, 2006 | Eric Lai

Posted on 11/17/2006 8:06:18 AM PST by Señor Zorro

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-83 next last
SCO II?

I wonder what the odds are of Microsoft actually attempting to bring a lawsuit.

1 posted on 11/17/2006 8:06:21 AM PST by Señor Zorro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Señor Zorro

Just the threat of such a lawsuit would sent a lot of upper management types I've worked for into a tizzy. It's really fun to hear the non-technical folks proclaim Micro$oft's technical superiority and then watch them back pedal when you show them the cost of switching from Linux/BSD to their faveorite. ;-)


2 posted on 11/17/2006 8:14:07 AM PST by pikachu (For every action there is an equal and opposite government program - Fig Newtons 1st Law)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ShadowAce

Pay up! =)


3 posted on 11/17/2006 8:19:52 AM PST by KoRn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rdb3; chance33_98; Calvinist_Dark_Lord; Bush2000; PenguinWry; GodGunsandGuts; CyberCowboy777; ...

4 posted on 11/17/2006 8:26:23 AM PST by ShadowAce (Linux -- The Ultimate Windows Service Pack)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Señor Zorro
The deal with SUSE Linux "is not exclusive," Ballmer added.

I'm sure that comes as a surprise to Novell.

5 posted on 11/17/2006 8:29:30 AM PST by ShadowAce (Linux -- The Ultimate Windows Service Pack)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Señor Zorro
In Bishop's Microsoft Blog, he quotes Ballmer as saying "We've had an issue, a problem that we've had to confront, which is because of the way the GPL (General Public License) works, and because open-source Linux does not come from a company -- Linux comes from the community -- the fact that that product uses our patented intellectual property is a problem for our shareholders" (emphasis mine).

This kind of stuff will stay in the news until a Linux distributor takes the offense and tries for a prelimary summary judgement that their Linux distribution does not infringe any issued MS patents.

6 posted on 11/17/2006 8:42:07 AM PST by rit
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ShadowAce

The hand behind the SCO lawsuits reveals itself?


7 posted on 11/17/2006 9:05:51 AM PST by Ernest_at_the_Beach (History is soon Forgotten,)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Señor Zorro

I would really like to see what this "innovation" is. There's a list out there somewhere that tracks Microsoft innovations. A possible innovation is posted, people look for prior art, and the decision is made. Out of many, I believe only a few were declared innovative -- like Microsoft Bob and Clippy.

Our patent system is so hosed right now. They'll grant a software patent on anything, even stuff that's been in open source for years.


8 posted on 11/17/2006 9:37:32 AM PST by antiRepublicrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: antiRepublicrat

"They'll grant a software patent on anything, even stuff that's been in open source for years."

I remember a Paul Harvey story about two guys who bet each other a case of their favorite beer who could get a patent first. Long-story-short, the guy who won patented the wheel.


9 posted on 11/17/2006 9:41:31 AM PST by L98Fiero (Terrorists, Communists and Liberals. All happy with a Democrat Congress)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: ShadowAce

I must admit this stuff confuses the hell out of me.

But it looks like MS agrees to pay Novell $440 mil, Novell pays MS $40 mil (couldn't have MS just agreed to pay Novell an even $400 mil?) all in exchange for MS agreeing not to sue Novell?

In short MS pays Novell money and in return MS agrees not to sue Novell?

Beam me up, Scotty.


10 posted on 11/17/2006 10:11:23 AM PST by 2 Kool 2 Be 4-Gotten
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Señor Zorro; ShadowAce; antiRepublicrat

Ballmer is probably correct, since the executive director of the Public Patent Foundation and senior counsel to the Free Software Foundation already admitted back in 2004 that Linux appears to violate many software patents, he claimed 283 likely infringements in the Linux kernel alone.

http://www.infoworld.com/article/04/08/02/HNmspatentsthreat_1.html


11 posted on 11/17/2006 10:47:31 AM PST by Golden Eagle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rit
This kind of stuff will stay in the news until a Linux distributor takes the offense and tries for a prelimary summary judgement that their Linux distribution does not infringe any issued MS patents.

Doubtful that will happen, with one of senior counsels of the FSF already admitting it appears there are hundreds of likely infringements in the kernel of Linux alone.

12 posted on 11/17/2006 10:50:07 AM PST by Golden Eagle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Golden Eagle
already admitted back in 2004 that Linux appears to violate many software patents, he claimed 283 likely infringements in the Linux kernel alone.

Yeah, yeah, yeah, we know. Also notice he said nothing about the validity of those patents. From the software patents I've seen, probably over 90% of software patents are junk (and that's not counting that software patents shouldn't even exist according to the USPTO).

As I said before, my program, conceived, designed and written by me using no "inspiration" from other sources aside from standard programming techniques I've learned ("here's how you normally save an XML file"), probably violates at least one software patent. I doubt there is even one large piece of software out there that doesn't violate several software patents.

Did you know there's a guy out there who got a patent in '98 based on what others were already doing using free software? Yep, then as they improve their free products he amends the '98 patent to include what they've done. Now he's suing them for patent infringement on things they did recently, saying it violates a patent issued in 1998.

13 posted on 11/17/2006 11:03:38 AM PST by antiRepublicrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: 2 Kool 2 Be 4-Gotten; Golden Eagle
In short MS pays Novell money and in return MS agrees not to sue Novell?

Microsoft is also paying so that Novell won't sue Microsoft over any infringements in Windows. Hear that GE? Even your beloved Windows infringes.

14 posted on 11/17/2006 11:05:12 AM PST by antiRepublicrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Golden Eagle
FSF already admitting it appears there are hundreds of likely infringements in the kernel of Linux alone.

They didn't say likely, they said possibly covered. You could drive your cat crazy with a laser pointer and it would be covered by a patent (yes, it's true, that patent was issued), and thus that would be included in the list of patents you are infringing on, along with whenever you make a wheel or swing on a swing set (yes, those were issued too). Do you think the patent owners would prevail in court?

15 posted on 11/17/2006 11:10:26 AM PST by antiRepublicrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: antiRepublicrat

Microsoft is also paying .....




So they each pay so they each won't sue. Ohhh-kaaay. To me (and could be I'm slow) I slip on my neigbor's sidewalk and he slips on mine. So we sit down and we each pay each other money so each one won't sue the other one. I think I got it.


16 posted on 11/17/2006 11:19:09 AM PST by 2 Kool 2 Be 4-Gotten
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Golden Eagle
Doubtful that will happen, with one of senior counsels of the FSF already admitting it appears there are hundreds of likely infringements in the kernel of Linux alone.

I was reffering to the commercial linux distro companies, not the FSF. For example, RedHat might have grounds, based on what is being reported, to file.

17 posted on 11/17/2006 12:30:22 PM PST by rit
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: rit

Sure they can file, but when the existing studies including those from Linux proponents show hundreds of likely violations, and not a lack of violations, what is their chance of winning?


18 posted on 11/17/2006 1:56:14 PM PST by Golden Eagle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: 2 Kool 2 Be 4-Gotten
So they each pay so they each won't sue. Ohhh-kaaay.

Yes, referred to as a "patent cross license agreement". I'm pretty sure Microsoft already had one with IBM and Sun, and now have one with Novell. If Red Hat doesn't have enough patents to enter into such an agreement, nor is willing to purchase the right to use Microsoft's patented technology, Microsoft could sue if they thought the reward was worth it, just as IBM is suing Amazon.com now for patent violation. I don't expect it though, at least not anytime soon, Microsoft doesn't have a history of "agressive" patent lawsuits, I expect smaller more agressive companies will eventually start suing Red Hat for patent infringement instead, like Firestar recently did over their Jboss middleware.

19 posted on 11/17/2006 2:07:05 PM PST by Golden Eagle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Golden Eagle
what is their chance of winning?

I would not venture to guess. Some suggest that MS put up or shut up. But the same can be said for the commerical linux distributors... if the code base does not infringe any issued MS patents then go for PSJ..... Otherwise do the later.

20 posted on 11/17/2006 2:19:37 PM PST by rit
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-83 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson