Slashdot Mirror

This 'magic number' keeps coming up, and the idea that by saying Linux 42, UI 65, etc etc somehow equates to a detailed description of patent breaches? Let's get real here. I want to see the actual claim. Show us the code.

Perchance the MS IP team are worried that if they actually showed which of their patents were infringed they would be laughed at? IANAL but it seems to me that even if by some remote chance a MS patent had been infringed by a kernel developer somewhere, that MS has the responsibility to let them know exactly what patent they have infringed. Failure to do so would seem to make any legal action they attempt nothing short of harassment. Or am I way off-base here? /. lawyers, where are you?

your code Balmer!

http://showusthecode.com/

I second that! http://www.showusthecode.com/

*coughcough* Sorry, had a chair in my throat there.

I would be surprised if this hasn't been mentioned already for this posting. A pity that the 1 May date has already come and gone.

1. If the patent has prior art, invalidate it in court.
2. If the patent's valid, work around it.
3. If the patent can't be worked around, remove the offending code.

Really... do.

Worse, Novell now benefits from Microsoft's patents getting more and more dangerous.

I'm a Novell customer, and Novell makes a decent amount of money off us. If Novell gave Microsoft a reason to sue us, we'd drop Novell and become an all-Microsoft shop.

I don't understand why people think Novell wants to jeopardizes it's business.

There was speculation that the deal was designed to scare Red Hat customers over to Novell. But I don't see that as reasonable either. If Microsoft sues Red Hat customers, Red Hat, the FSF, and indeed Novell will sue Microsoft to show us the code.

I just don't get it. We had one Linux server going into 2006, and because of our Novell license agreement, at the end of 2006 we had twenty-two. (We're up to 25 now). Seven or so of those were migrations away from NetWare - which is the sensible path Novell is suggesting to it's customers. Why does Novell want to jeopardize that?

What does make sense to me is that Novell kept trying to sell Linux into big companies, and the Microsoft FUD was working. The only real way for Novell to counter that was the Novell-MS deal.

My CIO thinks better of Linux, now that Microsoft has acknowledged it. If Microsoft was trying to sow FUD in our shop, that certainly back-fired.

Although, if the FSF is successful in cutting Novell's Achilles Heel, then I suppose the Microsoft gamble will have been worth it (to Microsoft at least).

"So you can't prove that God exists, but you still doubt that he doesn't? That wouldn't stand up in any decent court of law."

Ok, under what scenerio would a court of law be proving that someone exists or not?

...how about a claim on stolen code ?

Oh, and go take a look at Groklaw too. And by "taking a look" I mean, the archives of the last 4 years. A good read for starters :-)