Slashdot Mirror
Novell to Defend Open Source Using Patents
bbsguru writes "As another step in its transition to an Open Source developer, Novell has thrown the considerable weight of its patent portfolio in support of the movement. A letter from Novell North American President Ron Hovesepian to all of their channel partners today said, 'This initiative is aimed at any vendor that tries to mislead customers using intellectual property rights.'"
We believe that customers want and need freedom of choice in making decisions about technology solutions. Those considering Novell offerings, whether proprietary or open source, should be able to make their purchasing decisions based on technical merits, security, quality of service and value, not the threat of litigation. Novell intends to continue to compete based on such criteria.
Good, I like to hear that. It's nice having some of the "big dogs" on the side of Linux. But they seem to contradict themselves when they say:
As appropriate, Novell is prepared to use our patents, which are highly relevant in today's marketplace, to defend against those who might assert patents against open source products marketed, sold or supported by Novell.
Seems like a threat to anyone out there thinking about possible litigation to me. Now, I doubt that there is any serious issues w/the Linux kernel code when it comes to IP but what if someone did have a legitimate claim? Someone like Novell making open threats like this might have them think twice.
Just a thought.
Go Novell!
Woot for Novell, I think. It's interesting that they're only defending *their* open source software, but at least it is a step in the right direction.
I wonder what would happen to the world if more Free Software projects started patenting *their* stuff. I figure if you patent your software, you should have to make it open source.
Just some thoughts.
"Software is like sex; it's better when it's free." -Linus Torvalds
From Novell's website (emphasis _not_ mine) --
/me thinks it could be IBM, especially considering that they both have a bone or two to pick with His Highness Darth McBride.
:-)
As with all purchasing considerations, customers should keep software patents in perspective. In reality, open source software poses no greater risk of patent infringement than does closed source software.
Well, that's a smart statement. Coming from a company like Novell, I'm sure that it would make other companies take notice.
Consistent with this belief, Novell will use its patent portfolio to protect itself against claims made against the Linux kernel or open source programs included in Novell's offerings, as dictated by the actions of others.
Hmm, whom could the others be?
As appropriate, Novell is prepared to use our patents, which are highly relevant in today's marketplace, to defend against those who might assert patents against open source products marketed, sold or supported by Novell.
Brilliant! Simply brilliant. We now have atleast two big players (other than RedHat) who are prepared to offer legal support to Opensource, which is a great thing indeed!
Novell has previously used its ownership of UNIX copyrights and patents to protect customers against similar threats to open source software made by others.
We are a corporation, and therefore cannot legally say FUCK YOU! to SCO. However, we'll put it in such sweet-coated words hoping that the idiots over at Utah get what we mean before we haul their asses to court.
Yay! for Opensource
heh heh. I wonder if they had any organization in mind when they said that.
This tagline brought to you by 1500 monkeys in just under 17 years.
use the system to defeat the system. now that novell is going open, they look back and see how much non-free content they've accrued over the years and wonder how they can use it to fight for oss instead of against it.
the only thing novel has to worry about now is making sure this doesnt come back to haunt them... you can't play the devil's game without giving him his due at one point or anther, and patents are the devil.
BLING BLING. Meet the architecture that's changing everything.
Good to see a company holding a large patent portfolio openly announcing that it will basically nuke any target big enough to hit (includes most software companies) that attacks Linux.
Only in a Slashdot fantasy can a Slackware install turn into several hours of sex . . . . .
So I geuss an agressive patent portfolio is only good when its on the side of Linux?
Steal This Sig
Sounds nice... Don't know if this could eventually turn against OSS, but it sure does sound nice to have one of the bigger company's supporting OSS this way. I'm against software-patents (as in "a scrollbar" or "task-grouping", I'm sure there are even worse examples out there), but if they do turn legitimate in the EU, it sure counts to have some defense on the side of OSS. Go Novell!
Also, I should point out, so that people can understand how far the document goes, that Novell's threat is not useful against companies with which they have already executed a patent cross-license. These could include most of the large companies in the computer industry and might include Microsoft. And of course the document is not a promise to act against anyone. Novell still gets to decide who they sue.
Thanks
Bruce
Bruce Perens.
Troll? Give me a break. He's making an extremely valid point. Wordplay has become SO common in today's business world that a single mistake like the one that "garcia" pointed out could change the entire spin of the story.
so instead the "enemy" sells the "infringed" patents to a shell company (*cough: IP company) that itself makes no use of any patents Novell has.
Sam
blog.sam.liddicott.com
My inner slashdotter is telling me I like open
source put hate patent law. I'm so confused.
How am I supposed to Karama Whore this one?
Oh well must try my best. I'll just say w00t and
hope it's enought to appease the moderation god's.
Open Source has two very vocal and very visible advocates -- IBM and Novell. There's a strange contrast here between the big mainstream companies and the original "just for fun" ideas of Linux.
There's a part that want to see Linux dominate the global market...and those simply happy and content to be using it. I'm torn between wanting its ultimate success and being wary of "selling out" to the corporate world.
I guess that's one of the things the GPL is great for -- it allows Linux to take any direction people want it to go and still be perfectly Free.
It almost feels like a socialist slogan -- what's best for all of us (Linux community) is in reality the best for you as well (IBM/Novell).
I for one welcome our new SUSE-maintaining overlords.
Software companies often generate and cross license patents in patent pools. This type of activity defends against other companies who actually build products and have many patents (though not against the IP firms with nothing to offer but litigation).
Novell's step is a different way of accomplishing this. Would be interesting if the open source movement itself started developing patents to play a role in patent pools.
It seems like a lot of companys make some minor changes to code, then think they own that code. Good for Novell to stand up for open source. Oprn source, not open checkbooks.
roamingfeet
But there is a but...
Seeing is believing here. On a patent attack Novell will be tempted to cross license the issue, but for Novell customers only, not for Open Source users and distributers in general. It would be nice to see a company like Novell champion the defense of Open Source, and if they do it would be beneficial to the world in general, but how far will they go in a direction that will help competitors like RedHat as well as themselves?
Maybe RedHat and Novell will team up against attacks (RedHat already has a fund to protect Open Source over fraudulent copyright claims). That would really be beneficial, not least to RedHat and Novell!
Web Sig: Eddy Currents
It's been pretty clear for a while now that Novell wants to be a part of open source success. They announced their big enterprise server package last week (see http://www.novell.com/news/press/archive/2004/10/p r04068.html), which is driving continual SuSE upgrades and taking advantage of a bunch of Open Source work. They are making SuSE rock really hard, and it has what is so far my favorite package management tools. And anyway now they are 10 months ahead of schedule with their Enterprise stuff, thanks in part to the magic of open source.
Of course, none of this is helping to make the Netware client less of a beast on Windows.
---------------------
Rate free iPod offers: RateTheOffers.com
(Flat screens and Desktop PCs too)
Novell's running a class act here and they deserve our support so if you're in a position to select a distro for your company, take another look at Novell's offerings. If you download an Enterprise eval version 9, you get 30 days free installation support for it. You can't beat that.
Money for nothing, pix for free
Novell aren't doing this in "support of the movement", their only interest is to increase profits, don't fool yourselves.
Overall, it's quite positive for open source. BUT:
Among other things, Novell would seek to address the claim by identifying prior art that could invalidate the patent; demonstrating that the product does not infringe the patent; redesigning the product to avoid infringement; or pursuing a license with the patent owner.
This paragraph came from the Novell statement about how they would deal with a patent infringement claim. The last bit "pursuing a licence with the patent holder" might not get you what you want. Imagine if your OSS program ends up being only usable by users of SuSE/Novell Linux, because they bought an exclusive license for the patent...
David
What follows is the heavily PR'ed Novell letter, interspersed with the layman translation. Marvel at its simplicity and at the bully-like tone of it:
...don't be afraid: nooo Linux ain't bad, it's aaall good. It's soft and furry and you can sleep with our products at night. So...
...since our very survival depends on Linux and we still have old patents and stuff that are so vague we could slap a lawsuit on any badmouther's face in less time that you can say "disestablishmentarianism",...
...if you so much as hint at dissing our new shiny products, we'll sue your ass off with our old patents and...
...you better believe it cuz we're fucking serious about it! You better remember that...
...we fucking did it before with that old canard Unix so it's fucking true!
* We believe that customers want and need freedom of choice in making decisions about technology solutions. Those considering Novell offerings, whether proprietary or open source, should be able to make their purchasing decisions based on technical merits, security, quality of service and value, not the threat of litigation. Novell intends to continue to compete based on such criteria.
We don't make Netware or NDS products anymore, we don't have the money. So now we jump on the Linux bandwagon and make Linux-based products, and you better believe it's just as good as our old shit. But...
* As with all purchasing considerations, customers should keep software patents in perspective. In reality, open source software poses no greater risk of patent infringement than does closed source software.
* Consistent with this belief, Novell will use its patent portfolio to protect itself against claims made against the Linux kernel or open source programs included in Novell's offerings, as dictated by the actions of others.
* In the event of a patent claim against a Novell open source product, Novell would respond using the same measures generally used to defend proprietary software products accused of patent infringement. Among other things, Novell would seek to address the claim by identifying prior art that could invalidate the patent; demonstrating that the product does not infringe the patent; redesigning the product to avoid infringement; or pursuing a license with the patent owner.
* As appropriate, Novell is prepared to use our patents, which are highly relevant in today's marketplace, to defend against those who might assert patents against open source products marketed, sold or supported by Novell. Some software vendors will attempt to counter the competitive threat of Linux by making arguments about the risk of violating patents. Vendors that assert patents against customers and competitors such as Novell do so at their own peril and with the certainty of provoking a response. We urge customers to remind vendors that all are best served by using innovation and competition to drive purchasing decisions, rather than the threat of litigation.
* Novell has previously used its ownership of UNIX copyrights and patents to protect customers against similar threats to open source software made by others.
"A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
They should give an opinion on lawsuits from patent holding companies, who don't produce any product and are simply used to attack by proxy and are basically immune from counterattacks. IANAL, but a good workaround might be to attack whoever sold the patent to the holding company.
Software patents are bad, even when used for 'right' (ie. our) reasons. This is fighting fire with fire.
/me is off to find an alibi
Wake me up when the USPTO burns to the ground.
This sig is intentionally left blank
...Novell patents you!
the future is but past forgotten
Up until now, software patents SUCKED!
They're on our side now, but what if they turn against us?
Please correct me if I got my facts wrong.
I work in a shop that has Novell as the core controller for email and network authentication. There are plans for migrating to Linux servers with Novell services and ultimately Linux workstations using Novell services.
Some of my peers express hesitation on these moves where I assert "What is Novell but a set of services? They needn't be tied to any particular OS so why not a particularly useful, flexible and free one?" Hell, for that matter, Microsoft could easily do the same thing -- hosting their services on a Linux or BSD host server system to create an ultra-stable server system that can do one hell of a lot more than it does now. (Then they really WOULD have Windows Services for Unix!)
I think this statement goes a long way to ease any potential fears of Novell customers who are moving to their Linux-based products and I think that is their primary target. It's not enough for them to say "if you get sued, we'll pick up the bill." They have to take up a pro-active stance against anyone who would think about making such a move... and so that's clearly what they are doing.
Now I don't read this as them defending the whole of the OSS community, but it's still a rather large umbrella of protection they are suggesting here... potentially larger than they might at first realize? It boggles the mind to think about it, but it's a very reassuring move on Novell's part.
If this stuff keeps up, people will scoff at Microsoft for running a "proprietary operating system" when all others are running something that is more open, trusted and established.
Who the hell modded this up - at best it's redundant at worst it's flamebait.
NO ONE HERE SAID SOFTWARE PATENTS ROCKS.
However obviously its nice to have a company say they will defend (admittedly a limited amount off) OSS works against weird attacks. Like MS wielding their "innovative" double-click patent against the x.org project or some such.
It doesn't mean anyone condones sw patents, just that people are happy to see someone atleast do some good with a system that is basically crap.
Yes, I've read the article, but do you think this can really work...I am not against or for patents especially in this day and age of computers when innovation is key; yes I could see their use during the early 20th century but are they worth it now?!
Michael
http://s1.sfgame.us/index.php?rec=58163
You know, at first I was a bit reluctant to celebrate when Novell acquired Ximian and SuSE, wondering whether this would have the turnout along the lines of their previous Word Perfect acquisition, Netscape partnership, etc.
However, their dealings with SCO thus far have certainly been noteworthy. I especially like their to the point open letters.
This stated patent policy from Novell is a heartwarming read in this respect. It's straightforward - no BS, I feel - talk, and one of the most important points is even boldfaced.
Maybe it's the top-down nature of Novell approach to FOSS, you know, like the executives really (presumably) getting the message and passing it along downwards?
zWhat would an EWOULDBLOCK block, if an EWOULDBLOCK could block would? -- me
Now, the opponents of Open Source are able to point to us and say, "Look, these people want us to give up OUR software patents so they can steal OUR innovations, while at the same time they support the use of software patents whenever it suits THEIR purposes."
It makes us look like a bunch of fucking hypocrites, which we are, if this stupidity actually goes forward.
Boooo, Novell. You really don't get it, do you?
People seem to be well enamored to these announcements. The only problem I see is a direct conflict with the terms of the GPL and the fact that you people will hate it if Novell uses its patents against other Open Source vendors, such as dotGNU for example and if they try to patent certain parts of the Linux kernel. I dont think well of this and I for one will not, nor ever consider Novells solutions for my business. I will be holding a meeting with my staff to ensue the deletion of Novell products from my network and I do plan to withdraw myself from their partner channel. If Novell would turn these patents over to OSDL or the FSF so it can be assured that these patents will be enforced unbiased then I would probably feel better about them.
But is this move irrevokable? What if Novell is bought-out and and some new owner decides to make their profits off of IP licensing? How safe is it to assume that this makes you safe from infringment litigation?
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
Alas, it's pure marketing nonsense; FUD as bad as any that MS has ever been accused of putting out.
Consider:
As with all purchasing considerations, customers should keep software patents in perspective. In reality, open source software poses no greater risk of patent infringement than does closed source software.
Now this is a pretty bold assertion. But they seem to back it up..
Consistent with this belief, Novell will use its patent portfolio to protect itself against claims made against the Linux kernel or open source programs included in Novell's offerings, as dictated by the actions of others.
Right? Right? Well, no. not really.
The patent issue in OSS is "third party infringement" that works as such:
- Company P has a patent on X.
- OSS Developer A unknowingly uses X in his OSS product L.
- Company BigCo uses L. P notices that BigCo uses L and claims that because the source for L is "open", that BigCo has a legal duty to check to see that no patents are violated. P sues BigCo.
Contrast this to the case where product L$ is not OSS and so BigCo feels secure that even if there is some infringement, it could not have reasonably known about it (so P sues A$)The Novell claim does nothing about this third party problem except in the perverse and unlikely situation where invention P just happens to be actually based on some of Novell's prior art in the first place (and probably a few common variants of that, too). Great.. nice to see that Novell would fight for this, I guess. But that hardly seems worthwhile making an announcement over.
So how is this FUD? (or rather some weird inverse of FUD, where you're falsely trying to instill certainty and comfort). Plainly, because Novell has done nothing to address the fundamental problem of OSS and Patents but has claimed nevertheless that patents are not an issue.
N.B. In the final analysis, they might not be an issue. But do you want to be the first BigCo that gets sued by some P? I think it's reasonable for BigCos to sit out and wait until some other BigCo pays the legal bills to get that question solved..
IIRC, Novell retained ownership of the Unix Patents (if they aren't all already expired) when they transfered the buisness to old SCO. Since Linux is mostly implenting stuff that UNIX has already done, Novell should be safe. Basically, any functionallity that Linux implements has probably already been implemented in UNIX. therefore one of two things come into play 1) Novell already owns it, or 2)The person who asserts it would have to show why they didn't assert it for UNIX also at sometime over the last 30 years of UNIX's existance.
Another thing to remember is that Novell was the big deal in networking and networked apps back in the late 80's-early 90's, so they probably hold a lot of IP from their old netware days.
Under the GPL, you CANNOT distribute a work if you cannot give people the rights to *redistribute* it.
:)
So, any license they negotiated would allow everyone, not just Novell, to use the GPL'd work in question.
Now then, it's true--other licenses like the BSD license do *not* have this requirement, so we could get stuck with something becoming "Novell-only" (though even then, other entities could license the patent or use it in venues where the patent isn't recognized). But that's one of the reasons the GPL coerces you to make the software itself free for *all* and not just for yourself
Assert those patents and your turn to the darkside will be complete.
Or something like that.
Damn. I knew I shouldn't have stopped reading slashdot over the weekend.
There's a clear bias here. We cannot hold it against one company for using patents to defend their interests, and then not hold it against another company for using their patents to defend their interests.
Confused?
Let's at least try a little objectivity. SCO tries to use their patents to come against companies profiting off of Open Source = bad.
Novell uses their patents to warn others not to sue them for using Open Source = good.
To be consistent you must frown upon this move by Novell, not pat them on the back.
"Hey you guys! Don't put rocks in your snow balls! You're gonna hurt someone" [whisper] "ok, here, start making our snow balls with rocks in 'em...."
"All great things are simple & expressed in a single word: freedom, justice, honor, duty, mercy, hope." --Churchill
If they only cross licence for their own users Novell would not be able to distribute GPL code.
They would have to leave it at a simple, we infringe, you infringe, lets leave it at that.
...software patents are bad.
And as the recent case between sun and kodak demonstrated, patents are much more dangerous in the hands of those outside the industry, because there is no way to retaliate with the same weapons.
Imagine mister Bill create some company with his own money, like he did with Corbis for pictures. Let call this company "Billy et ses tueurs".
"Billy et ses tueurs" then buy a lot of software patents, and then selectively enforce them again linux (and even if not selectively, the fact there is a patent is enough to pose problems to OSS).
How can Novell use patents to defeat "Billy et ses tueurs" ? Look at the damages patents only companies are making.
Really what this sounds like is giving the Open Source guys some weapons in the Patent Cold War, where almost any company could start a litigation WWIII.
While it's a sad statement, it's probably good to have at this point. Without it, it's only a matter of time before MS or someone else tries to litigate RedHat or similar to fiscal obilivion.
I'd prefer the market weren't in this situation, mind you (And Novell probably does too), but all things considered, it's probably a good thing to have.
Now, let's just hope Novell stays relatively beneficent.
~D
This sig has been enciphered with a one-time pad. It could say almost anything.
There have been a lot of people who state their opinion's such as "..we don't believe in patents, we should not use them" or "..we should not play back at their game", but regardless, they need to really sit back and look at the situation.
Everyone is beefing up their patent porfolio's except the open source community. I am a person who after almost 2 decades came from the M$ camp to the linux camp and i understand both forms of logic, but the truth is patents are bad, but they are here to stay. Yes, patents suck, especially for IP, but they are not going away. The corporations have their hands too deep in the pockets of the gov't to even consider reform at this point in time. The conclusion? Well, the conclusion does not mean run out and patent every idea you have and give it to a foundation to safeguard for public use, but it means that maybe it's really not a half bad idea that novell is doing this because in the end if you take too hard of a approach to refusing to touch a patent you will get steamrolled by MS, RIAA, MPAA and every other corportaion that would love to patent the living hell out of your life.
I would rather know that everything is protected from attacks time being and let things naturally work themselves out. Think about it, if the open source community can keep from getting steam rolled for just 4-5 more years, we all win.
Does this mean someone will be porting NetWare to the Xbox, PS2, iPod, Toaster, Ti-82, PDP-8......
Don't Crease the Weasel!
Patents in the software world today are like nuclear weapons. You want a powerful arsenal in order to ensure that no one attacks you. By the same token, you are wary of attacking anyone else because neither of you will come out well.
So if Novell is positioning their patents to defend open source, it's morally the same as if open source just went nuclear. Or more accurately, made a defense pact with a nuclear power - open source can help Novell compete, and Novell can protect open source. Indeed, in IBM's countersuit to SCO they drew their patent sword, IIRC. Granted SCO attacked IBM specifically, but if IBM decides to say "be nice to the open source community or we might decide to check you out for patent violations" that would go a long way toward keeping things quite. Open source would be given, in effect, honary membership in the patent superpower standoff. People who might consider trying to use patents to crush open source *cough*Microsoft*cough* might be forced to think twice. Legal costs for any fight of this type are really quite scary, to say nothing of the time lost. Considering how fast the software business moves, it wouldn't be surprising to me if most lawsuits are technologically irrelevant by the time they get finished.
This is a solution I hadn't considered to the patent problem, and one I'm not wild about because a) the fundamental problem doesn't get fixed and b) it depends on the good will of companies. By the same token, however, of those companies ARE making $$ from open source it is most definitely in their self interest to keep the vultures off the open source community as a whole, and I suppose in today's society there really isn't much we can count on except self interest.
"I object to doing things that computers can do." -- Olin Shivers, lispers.org
i am not a lawyer...but is it an oxymoron to use patents with open source? how does one reconcile this?
Novell has to look at their stock price MS does not-C'est La Difference
What open source needs is a patent organization like Creative Commons does for copyright. Open source developers would apply for a copyright (possibly with financial support from the organization). They would then sign the copyright over to the organization. The organization would issue a perpetual, royalty free license for all open source products who wish to use it. Any non-open source company wishing to use one of the open source patents could cross-license patents with the organization. The organization would be in charge of conducting negotiations, and if necessary suing, the infringing closed source vendors. They could also help with suits against open source developers with lawyers/money/countersuits.
Really, we need to treat patents just like we do copyrights. We use the GPL to counter the evils of copyrights and turn the law to our advantage. An organization such as above would use patents much the same way.
I still have more fans than freaks. WTF is wrong with you people?
"Hey you guys! Don't put rocks in your snow balls! You're gonna hurt someone" [whisper] "ok, here, start making our snow balls with rocks in 'em...."
:)
Sounds like Bush's methods of preventing a nuclear proliferation.
Ok, now step back from the post and realize it's a joke
Pro-virginity activists say they will begin to fuck for the cause of virginity.
Reprint from:
http://linuxtoday.com/news_story.php3?ltsn=2004-0
Seems a bit of a no-brainer. Patents will be used to suppress free development more and more vigorously, maybe at least until people get so annoyed there's a revolution or something (paper-pushing career bureaucrats sometimes forget that the geeks are the ones that build the weapons, in the end...)
If Europe is stupid enough to allow software patents (and they may well be...), then Microsoft may go on a patent offensive. People thinking "oh IBM will then too" are missing the point - that would be the "chicago prison shuffle" - Microsoft may send Linux geeks running to IBM, but then they'll just be controlled by IBM's patent portfolio, and IBM will then innovate (as in bring new technology to market) in a controlled, slow, understandable by MBA jackasses pace, and the IT industry oligopoly can go back to being a cosy feudal system where Microsoft feels at home - even if they have to compete, it's with comprehensible, corporate enemies, not a massy swarm of globally-distributed and loudly bickering free people that innovate whenever they feel like it and, it must seem to Microsoft, totally at random in catastrophe curve adoption patterns (what? they have antialiasing? Last year they had crappy 1-bit fonts!?!) - only patents can give the old guard power to slow that sort of thing.
"Choice of Masters is Not Freedom". I don't trust IBM much more than I like Microsoft. Recognise that software patents, so helpfully identified by the Open Source community as "something that can kill or cripple open source" in the 1990s, will be used to do just that, unless we stop them!
Now replace IBM in the above by their proxy, "Novell"
DO NOT TRUST Novell.DO NOT TRUST IBM. They are not your friends. Whether it's Microsoft's or IBM's or Novell's patent portfolio, control is wrested away from us, the citizen developers, by software patents. Software patents themselves are WRONG. Always remember that.
The fact that they might both be referred to as "intellectual property" does not change the fact that they are two completely different ball games.
Novell... was... evil... but now... good..? But Novell's... always been...
GAAAAH! BRAIN HURTS!
>> KABOOM! <<
The bitter lessons of a veteran coder: http://bitterprogrammer.blogspot.com
All your patent are belong to MS...
Wow I sure can't talk as cool as you, but maybe someday I'll be able to, and maybe I can grow a DA and roll smokes into my T shirt and buy me a motorsickle, and then maybe we can hang out together and stuff, and maybe even surf down the beach with some awesome chicks, whaddaya think, huh, could we?
The obvious targets for this bold statement from Novell have to be Microsoft and SCO. I can just imagine both Bill and Darl in apoplexy at reading this. Should sit well with the judge in the SCO v Novell case. Bold indeed.
Still, it does not seem to have done anything to share values in NOVL or SCOX. Did this come out after market close?
From TFA:
"Consistent with this belief, Novell will use its patent portfolio to protect itself against claims made against the Linux kernel or open source programs included in Novell's offerings, as dictated by the actions of others."
"As appropriate, Novell is prepared to use our patents, which are highly relevant in today's marketplace, to defend against those who might assert patents against open source products marketed, sold or supported by Novell. Some software vendors will attempt to counter the competitive threat of Linux by making arguments about the risk of violating patents. Vendors that assert patents against customers and competitors such as Novell do so at their own peril and with the certainty of provoking a response."
This is a clear and straightforward warning that Novell has the ammo to take any potential SCO-wannabe down. It speaks specifically of using Novell's software patents against those who try to assert patents of their own. IOW, if you try to stop open-source via the court system, Novell will take the same tack against you.
Is a world without software patents preferable? Of course. And if/when we get to that point, Novell's software patents will be just as invalidated as Microsoft's, so Novell's statement won't matter. But until that day, there is an obvious benefit from a deterrent to future submarine-patent companies that think that they can litigate themselves into the penthouse.
Bill is so filthy rich that he doesn't even give a sheet about any of this anymore.
Darl on the other hand, has been sheeting his pants daily for the past few months since his big IBM lawsuit gamble blew up in his face and his stock price became insignificant once again.
That read the article and said "hypocrits" ?
Any closed source firm does it and it is just another evil corporation. Any open source firm does it and it correlates to world peace.
Its interesting how the SCOduggery aimed at Linux has forced Novell to embrace exactly the fundamental principle of patents upon which they were originally built. A patent is a way to protect an invention without secrecy: in fact, a patent requires disclosure of all details required to build a copy of the invention, and registers that invention, in that form, with the government. The government is then able to protect the invention from copies for long enough for the inventor to have a chance to recoup their investment. And other inventors can tell whether they are inventing something already invented - both to prevent serendipitous competition, and as a guide to the inventions available for use. Simple, until patents are abused by Congress and their bribers^Wcontributors, offering patents and copyright protections on secret designs, or not even implemented (like intangible business processes or mathematics), and extending patents on the basis of profitability, rather than recoupability.
Open Source is exactly the way that software would be protected, consistent with the original sound principles of patents. In the online market, temporary artifical government-created monopolies on inventions aren't the key to protecting investments in inventions; upgrades, service and community support are the key. Open Source is IP protection in the service of art and science, as specified in the Constitution, rather than the corporate welfare the PTO has become, a pernicious hybrid of corporate socialism and monopoly that is choking innovation to feed a few aging inventors.
--
make install -not war
because any company that is actually willing to take this stance to defend open source deserves my investment... especially one that can actually make money as well.
As an aside, does anyone else think that this may have something to do with the Sun/Microsoft settlement that allows MS to sue OpenOffice users?
My inner slashdotter is telling me I like open source put hate patent law. I'm so confused.
The GNU GPL fights for software freedom using copyright law. Novell's new defense policy fights for software freedom using patent law.
For those of you worried that Novell would only use this to protect their own customers, the GNU GPL states:
7. If, as a consequence of a court judgment or allegation of patent infringement or for any other reason (not limited to patent issues), conditions are imposed on you (whether by court order, agreement or otherwise) that contradict the conditions of this License, they do not excuse you from the conditions of this License. If you cannot distribute so as to satisfy simultaneously your obligations under this License and any other pertinent obligations, then as a consequence you may not distribute the Program at all. For example, if a patent license would not permit royalty-free redistribution of the Program by all those who receive copies directly or indirectly through you, then the only way you could satisfy both it and this License would be to refrain entirely from distribution of the Program.
The stand taken today by Novell is positive. They should be commended and congradulated for this move. Nobody is under the illusion that Novell have suddenly accepted the true religion of OSS, however do you honestly believe companies will continue to support us if we continue to be critical even when they have done what they can to support the movement.
We know that for companies its the bottom line that counts - however while companies such as IBM and Novell are aligned, why not cooperate and make the most of the opportunities. Yes, at some time in the future they may change their tune - but right now they are supporting us.
I'm hearing echoes in my memory here. I'm not sure whether they're coming from a State of the Union speech or Danny Devito in Other People's Money:
"We reject as false the choice between our safety and our ideals." --The American President (20.1.2009)
They are not here to read, they are here to harass. Getting a few stories accepted has earned me a swarm of them that post the most vile things. Have a look at my posting history and you will see one or two of them for everything I say. Oh well.
I think someone is paying them to disrupt conversation here. Along with the various flavors of trolls, it looks like an evolved Barkto system.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
Novell has thrown its lot in with Open Source. There is no doubt now. Sun removed itself from this fight by cross licensing all its technology to Microsoft and agreeing to no lawsuits regarding patents for the next ten years. It is becoming apparent now what that $2B Java settlement was really about. (And everyone thought MS got the short end of the stick. How wrong we were.) But the biggest player in the patent game is IBM. Their portfolio dwarfs everyone else. If they will make a similar statement to what Novell just has then they can cut Microsoft off before they take the battle to a field of their own choosing.
Twitter, you're a petulant cock-gobbling sycophant to Linux Torvaldyos! Quit taking DP from ESR and RMS's feculent cocks and why don't you try to stop sucking quite so much? Get out of your parents' basement and see the real world - maybe then you'll see how pathetic you sound, with your neverending stream of bullshit about how Microsoft is stalking you. Wasn't it you who said that Microsoft believes your insane ranting is actually a threat to them, so they PAY PEOPLE to reply to you on Slashdot? No sir, I don't get any money. I do it for the love. Someone has to go up against your paranoid whining. So get back in your cage and shut the fuck up already.
As I understand it from looking at the GPL and the Apache license debate, Novell may use GPL just fine, they just may not bill or obstruct someone who uses the patent in GPL'ed source.
This would either force competitors to crosslicense patents, or to release their software under the GPL.
Since the GPL seems to handle patents indirectly, it might under some circumstances be possible in theory for Novell to pull back their promise and use patents against free source, but then they would face a quagmire of licenses that get voided, and could be subject to a legal DDOS.
I'm still trying to figure out what people mean by 'social skills' here.
If Java infringes those patents then, i guess, Mono does too. Both MS and Sun have no problems with Kodak anymore. What about Novell?
I've read somewhere that Kodak's patents predate even thought-to-be-prior-art CORBA... seems like Gnome is in a serious trouble.