Slashdot Mirror
Patents and the Penguin
In an article entitled Patents and the Penguin, the non-partisan Alexis de Tocqueville Institute observes, "[i]t is not uncommon today for patent fights to erupt even between parties that have engaged in rigorous diligence. By contrast, open source developers and distributors do not engage in patent searches, thus, there is a real possibility we will see a major patent fight involving open source, sooner than later. The article also ominously warns: "IBM will be competing with large Linux-based developers and distributors themselves. As the deployment of Linux increases, it can be expected that IBM will be going head-to-head with its "friends" in the Linux community. It is unquestionable that the biggest irony of all will be when Big Blue resorts to using its war chest of patents against a "friend" in the Linux community." Even Homer Simpson can see this coming.
Sadly, I believe this threat will ultimately make the SCO debacle pale in comparison.
"No matter where you go, there you are." -- Buckaroo Banzai
If it is in FOSS software, it is, by definition, obvious to someone who is skilled in the art. Therefore, it is not patentable.
Is this reasonable?
It's very unlikely indeed. People who worry about this don't understand IBM very well. IBM makes money - they will continue to make money for time immemorial because their method of doing business is a time-tested and good one. They have little to no interest in Linux software as a product. They are interested in support and ancillary services for large corporate clients. They aren't going to change their focus because they know where the money is.
To them, OSS isn't a stick to beat Microsoft with. It's a means of ensuring their dominance in the delivery of computing power and corporate support. If everyone runs a generic OS, that benefits IBM, as long as that OS isn't proprietary.
HBI's Law: Frequency of calling others Nazis is directly correlated with the likelihood of the accuser being Communist.
IBM allows anyone to license any and/or all of its patents. All you have to do is give them a call and they will be more than happy to work out an agreement with you. The large patent portfolio is more of a defensive measure - if IBM is sued, it's more than likely that they can countersue with a few choice patent violations.
Bottom line - don't sue IBM unless you are sure you haven't infringed on ANY of their IP.
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."
- Evelyn Beatrice Hall
I think IBM recognizes that it's getting free labor from the community. I don't think they'll flex their patent muscles over that w/r/t Linux, unless some corporate goomer tries to prevent them from getting their free labor and goodwill (coughSCOugh). Other software that competes with stuff they sell? That's another matter.
Microsoft, reportedly, is patenting everything in sight. As the IBM portfolio begins to expire they may begin to rival IBM in active software and process patents. The real concern is in the application layer and interoperability protocols. This area is infinitely variable and still offers some hope for profitability, if a company can get a lock on a needed software function. Expect to see hostile action and possible barratry against security protocols, multimedia projects, groupware, web application interfaces and maybe even virtual machine systems. These are all areas where research is done and new ideas are being tried, and probably areas where MS and IBM are filing new software patents. They are certainly areas where MS and IBM hope to make money on software or delivery of unique services. Patents are a way to keep their offerings (legally) unique.
2. force them to open up their approval process to the public so that these trivial patents won't even get approved as a condition of winning #1.
3. Freedom!
AC comments get piped to
A rummage of Slashdot shows that they did an earlier FUD article on associating Terrorism with the GPL. It was suspected that it the institute was inflenced or funded by Microsoft
Donte Alistair Anderson Roberts - hi son!
Karma: Chameleon
Call my stupid.. but how exactly do you sue an open source project? I can understand suing Redhat or Suse.. but what about non-commericial distributions?
How could a judge award damages for lost revenue when you didn't make any money out of their idea anyway?
Simon.
Say an open source company (e.g. Red Hat) with a portfolio of friendly patents gets in trouble financially. Somebody unfriendly could then snap them up (Baystar?) and decide to defend their patents.
Don't put off until tomorrow what you can leave until the day after.
it can be expected that IBM will be going head-to-head with its "friends" in the Linux community.
So if I'm reading this correctly, AdTI (AKA: Microsoft) is saying IBM is going to wind up turning on the Open Source community. Hmmm, let's see, which is more likely:
1. AdTI sent their empty-headed mouthpieces to the showers, actually hired some economy, psychology, an legal theory research people, did a complete workup on IBM, and have found that IBM's psychological and business strategy makeup is such that it will eventually grow deranged and attempt to kill off its fastest growing consulting division.
2. AdTI (AKA: Microsoft) thought to themselves, "hmmm, if we... er, I mean, Microsoft (wink, wink) try to use our... er, their patents against Linux, we're going to get slapped with an antitrust suit so big it'll make our last series of losses look like a traffic ticket . . . Patents are the only thing that can stop Linux now . . . I know what we'll do, we'll foment conflict. We'll say IBM is going to turn on the Linux community; those hotheaded hackers will turn on IBM just like they've turned on Sun. Then IBM will get all pissed off and go to the patent pimp-hand to try to bring those evil hackers in line. The resulting infighting may or may not kill Linux, but it will at least keep Linux and IBM distracted while we steal a few more years of monopoly profits from the world's businesses and private citizens, and we can use it in the media to claim noone who is using Linux is safe from the scourge of IBM."
Which one do you think is a more realistic scenario?
Even Homer Simpson can see this coming.
Only Homer Simpson would allow himself to be shined on by such a transparent seduction.
Stop-Prism.org: Opt Out of Surveillance
It's not that they're evil, just that corporations are psychopaths. (Their conclusion is debatable, but worth thinking about.)
One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
Patents definitely aren't lost if they aren't enforced, but if IBM has patents in GPL code that they've distributed, the I believe that the doctrine of "promissary estoppel"(sp?) would apply, and thus they wouldn't be able to enforce that patent against any derived work.
Basically what this means is that by distributing code as GPL, IBM has promissed to abide by the license, and people are legitimately allowed to claim the right to use the GPL conditions on their derived works. (I don't know the CPL, but similar conditions may apply. It does qualify as a free license.)
CAUTION: IANAL. Use the above opinion with caution.
I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.