Slashdot Mirror


Gates: Microsoft IP Finds Its Way Into Free Software

Andy Tai writes "While speaking to financial analysts and commenting on the SCO lawsuit, Bill Gates made the claim that Microsoft's IP is also included in Free/Open source software. Without being specific, he said "There's no question that in cloning activities, IP from many, many companies, including Microsoft, is being used in open-source software. When people clone things, that often becomes unavoidable." Considering Microsoft's claims of ownership over technologies like CIFS, does this mean Microsoft may also launch SCO-style attacks against Free Software/Open Source?"

9 of 848 comments (clear)

  1. historically speaking by yorkrj · · Score: 5, Interesting

    If we look back at the early suits involving Microsoft and Apple, there may be indicators of how this might turn out. In that case Apple was suing Microsoft for duplicating the look and feel of their GUI but Apple didn't win. I don't know the details of what MS is claiming but does this qualify as a bonafied legal precident?

  2. Re:Stupid! by saden1 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Hay, if they clime open source stole some of their IP, then they'll just have to open up their source codes so we can see if they've stolen any GPL'ed code from OSS.

    --

    -----
    One is born into aristocracy, but mediocrity can only be achieved through hard work.
  3. Re:I highly doubt it! by Alan+Partridge · · Score: 5, Interesting

    and how do you know that Microsoft is actively poisoning OSS projects with MS code SPECIFICALLY so that it can legally destroy them? What do you know about project contributors other than their email addresses?

    --
    That was classic intercourse!
  4. Re:A possible first step on a very long road. by telecaster · · Score: 5, Interesting

    If you can't beat them, sue them.

    Microsoft is seeing the end. The end is near and they are starting to prepare for it by using the courts as a an offense instead of building a better product. The only defense (instead of building a better product) is to sue the product thats beating the shit out of you and tie them up legally.

    This exact thing is happening to me. I created a product that is better than my one competitor out there. I sell it for a fraction of the cost and it's better technology (of course it's based on Open Source). I've taken 20 - 30 new customers from my one competitor in the last six 5 months. Not bad.

    Well, what does the competitor do? They pull a credit report on my company, start making "wild claims" (read: FUD) about me and the company to their existing customers, even went as far as changing their product to make it hard for their existing customers to leave. Recently, I'm hearing that they are using lawyers now to find out information about me and my company... It's an ugly world.

    What am I going to do? hahaha. Ignore eveything and keep going on. I won't stop. They'll have to show up with the Sheriff's to pull me out of my office. My belief, this is not about winning a court case, it's about "killing the little guy by legally strangling them."

    The days of innovation and competition are over.

  5. It's not just the code, it's patents and concepts by Pavan_Gupta · · Score: 5, Interesting

    But it's not just the code! That's where you're missing the most critical part of his claim. When you patent softare concepts, you're patenting every array of copying that can happen, and that's the sad part of the matter. Open Source, though only out there for non profit means (until you arrive at Redhat, and the such), has to be aware that it can't trample the rights of big companies, even if it's being sucked dry of all of it's code at the same time.

    We live in a capitalistic world, and frankly, an attack like this should be expected. It's a great idea to have people working on open source software for the fun of it, but it has to be original ideas. OSS is like the product of a company. If it's created and it tramples the rights of others, then companies that have been trampled will have the right to come back and request damages from ANYONE that uses the software.

    It's a frightening world out there for Open Source Software, but it's a real world. We need not just look past these claims as "Micro$oft hogwash" or anything of the sort. SCO and Microsoft might be making VERY valid points, and it's something the OSS community MUST watch out for.

    I love Open Source Software, but I also respect the rights of others, however evil they might be.

  6. RMS may sound like a broken record but he's right by Rosco+P.+Coltrane · · Score: 5, Interesting

    From the article:

    "One thing about the GPL is that you can't just license IBM Linux, or Red Hat Linux," Gates said. "The way the GPL works, if you license any Linux, you have to license all Linux."


    What a bunch of crap. This is disinformation at its best.

    - Linux is a Unix kernel clone.

    - There is no such thing as Red Hat Linux or IBM Linux. There are IBM or RH distributions that make use of the Linux kernel

    - Wtf does "licensing any Linux" and "licensing all Linux" means ? I'm assuming Gates mean licensing any Linux-based distro, in which case you adhere to whatever licensing terms the distro is released under, licensing terms which in turn are compliant with the GPL (since Linux is included).

    That blurb from Gates means rigorously nothing whatsoever. But most people aren't even aware of what the GPL is, and when they quickly read something like that, they decude "uuh, Linux is dangerous to my business" or something. That's just ridiculous.

    As much as I hate RMS' rants, flamewars and stubbornness, I must admit we need him more than ever today.

    --
    "A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
  7. We don' need no steenking halloween documents! by leonbrooks · · Score: 5, Interesting

    We see it in TimeLine suits, the shafting of SpyGlass Systems, Blue Mountain Greeting Cards et al, the clone wars beteen MS-DOS and DR-DOS, the emBorgment of STAC Systems to settle yet another suit, and so on ad nauseum. Heck the company started by dumpster-diving for printouts of other people's software, and probably also had a copy of the Dartmouth BASIC source in hand while they wrote their 4K ROM BASIC (which they had already sold as pre-existing; ie, their first product was vapourware, the start of a long tradition). This is the company that copied the Mac interface right down to details like throwing away variable-sized elevators in order to look more Mac-like (and got sued for that one too).

    This is a severe case of the event horizon casting aspersions about the kettle's colour! "Chutzpah" isn't a substantial enough concept for this, it isn't even in the running!

    --
    Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing
  8. Hoo, boy, it would do a LOT more than that! by leonbrooks · · Score: 5, Interesting
    If it can be shown that Microsoft deliberately contributed (for example) several MS-Windows components to the Linux kernel, there would be grounds for subpoenaing the MS-Windows sources so that every kernel contributor had access to check for similarities in code.

    /* This patch to fix pluralisation in usb-storage submitted by [insert countless email addresses here]. */

    --
    Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing
  9. What about Germany? by Idou · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Can they now close down the MS German office just like they did the SCO German office for making unsubstantiated claims?

    I am not sure how smart this is for MS. I would think they would want to be distancing themselves from SCO at this point. SCO has obviously been manipulating the financial system by their outrageous and contradictory claims. If SCO is found guilty for pumping up its stock price by making claims about Linux IP, wouldn't MS then be in a difficult situation? Not even going into anti-trust issues . . .

    --
    Sdelat' Ameriku velikoy Snova!