IBM Has 'No Intention' of Using Patents Against Linux

bendelo writes "In his keynote address on Wednesday at LinuxWorld, IBM Senior Vice President of Technology and Marketing Nick Donofrio assured the Linux nation his company would not assert its formidable patent portfolio against the Linux kernel and strongly advocated others to promise the same. This comes following an independent study by insurance firm OSRM who revealed this week that the Linux kernel might use up to 283 patented methods. This seems a smart move by the Big Blue to help counter the FUD going around." A zdnet.com.com story has a response from Bruce Perens, who basically says he wants to see it in writing. :)

Comments

I don't understand...

[Enigma_Man]

I mean... it's a very nice gesture and all, but if this is where we're headed, what's the point of software patents at all? Making exceptions to rules generally nullifies the power a rule has.

-Jesse

Re:I don't understand...

[Durzel]

Commercially IBM doesn't have anything to fear from Linux, and in fact its current business model would suggest it has everything to gain from ensuring that it is looked upon favourably by pro-Linux parties.

The only real difference in this case is that IBM is using its software patents as a means to paint itself as "the good guys" (take note SCO), which is every bit as commercially viable as the more traditional litigious application of software patents.

Re:I don't understand...

[Otter]

IBM, and most other huge engineering companies, have enormous patent portfolios (not just software patents) that they mostly carry for defensive purposes. This works since they're basically all probably infringing on each other, and the patents serve as a sort of Mutual Assured Destruction.

That's why the real headaches come from patent suits from companies with no substantive business of their own to lose.

Re:I don't understand...

[MartinG]

There is no positive good in software patents. The only use they have is in killing off competition and maintaining a monopoly.

Real innovation in software is not in ideas or "inventions" (which are easy) but in implementations. (which is of course covered by copyright law already and works well when enforced)

Hopefully if the lawmakers see people like IBM doing things like this and in the end realise the system is broken and eventually do something about it.

Read -all- of the statement

[pedestrian crossing]

IBM has no intention of asserting its patent portfolio against the Linux kernel, unless of course we are forced to defend ourselves (emphasis added)," said Nick Donofrio...

I agree with Perens

[trybywrench]

I agree with Perens, I'd like to see it in writing as well. Everyone likes riding on the shoulders of IBM as if they're some savior. You can almost here the oss fighters telling themeselves "finally, a big guy in the corner for the little guy fighting for the cause".

clue for the clueless, IBM is in it for IBM, if the tide ever changes and oss's destruction becomes favorable for IBM don't expect any mercy.

Makes Sense

[wackysootroom]

IBM cannot assert any of it's patents against linux, since they:

1. Contributed to the linux kernel
2. Would look very silly and incongruent for going against something it uses to make money

This is just counter-FUD to keep IBM's linux customers satisfied.

A promise?

[Manip]

Everyone who has ever owned or worked in business knows that a promise is nothing... Business is all about contracts, IBM might have well not said anything at all. What they need to do is sign a contract with FSF or some other big open source software org.

As good as a handshake?

[Telex4]

Bruce Perens ... basically says he wants to see it in writing

Well quite. What reason have we got to trust IBM? Just because their current business interests are tied in with the Linux kernel, it doesn't follow that they're never going to attack any Free Software project with patents. They even added the proviso that they won't attack the kernel "unless, of course, we are forced to defend ourselves"!

An executive making a promise like that at a trade show is more or less meaningless. Now if they signed a legal agreement with the Free Software Foundation promising never to attack any GPL-ed project, or even just with the kernel guys, there'd be something to celebrate here.

And of course the wider issue is that they should lobby against software patents full-stop; they damage Free and proprietary software alike, mostly affecting small and medium businesses and community projects. But of course IBM is never going to do that ;-)

Formally enacting the terms of the Linux GPL

[NZheretic]

It's time to take a release of the 2.6.x Linux kernel and get the CEOs of IBM,Sun,Novell,Redhat,Mandrake and any other organizations who which to join in, to distribute a copy of the source of the Linux kernel to each other and to Linus/OSDN for a token monetary amount. This would formally enact the terms of the GPL license, which effectively ensures that upstream distributers grant an implicit license to downstream recipients to use any intellectual property, patents or trade secrets the Linux kernel uses under the terms of the GPL.

Re:In writing? Here you go

[Anonymous Coward]

Seriously, we need it in writing ... Unisys said the same thing (in writing) about GIFs and backtracked.

CEO's change etc. Make up of companies change. Even a written statement could easily be "reinterpreted" etc. by highly paid lawyers.

But still .. having it in legal writing is better than nothing. And right now we have nothing.

Re:I'm shocked

[LordKaT]

While other posters have pointed out that this is about IBMs bottom line, I would like to point out that this is about IBMs bottom line for the long term. IBM could easily crush Linux in endless court battles, and "win" the rights to Linux, and gain - in the short term - whatever money they can gain; however, by pledging not to patent-slap Linux, they're also making an investment in their bottom line: Linux can continue to grow and mature, therefore, IBMs business can also grow.

Don't ever fool yourself: a business is ALWAYS about the bottom line. IBM just happens to plan beyond the next Quarterly report.

Re:In writing? Here you go

[AviLazar]

Yup, they have "no intentions" - which does not mean that they will not do so in the future. While I am not saying that IBM is being sneaky and trying to lull people into a false state of safety - it should be noted that "no intentions" means just that - they are not intending on suing...which means it could change