Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

MS Indemnifies Customers Against IP Threats

Posted by timothy on from the we-guarantee-this-avacado-won't-eat-your-baby dept.

bigtallmofo writes "Microsoft announced today that it will indemnify nearly all its customers against claims that their use of Microsoft software infringed on any intellectual property rights. The only exception will be for embedded versions of Windows, since vendors are able to modify the source code. Is Microsoft opening itself to defending thousands of lawsuits against their customers?"

4 of 257 comments (clear)

  1. This isn't the first time by leroybrown · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Henry Ford did something similar to this in the early 20th century. Other automobile manufacturers claimed to have a patent or some such nonsense on what a car is. They didn't like Ford and wouldn't "license" the idea to him, and threatened to sue anyone who bought a car from Ford. Ford insured his customers against any lawsuit brought against them by the other car manufacturers. It was a huge coup for his business and Ford eventually won out his lawsuit against the other manufacturers.

    --
    Founder, Americans Allied Against Alliteration
  2. Re:Will help with all the existing lawsuits... by sqlrob · · Score: 5, Interesting

    What about TimeLine suing MSSQL users?

  3. re: will help with all the existing lawsuits... by ed.han · · Score: 5, Interesting

    this is about something much bigger:

    "the company plans to make indemnity a new plank in its "get the facts" campaign, which touts the advantages of windows over linux."

    IOW, it's benefitting from SCO's FUD. of course, at some point, SCO will run out of gas, these IP cases go away, but for those M$-thralls whose contracts renew, that resolution will probably come too late.

  4. FUD, and /. bought it? by RealProgrammer · · Score: 5, Interesting

    This is just FUD, I think.

    Intellectual property falls into the following general areas. Infringement is completely different for each area:

    1. Patents
      Anyone using patented technology (even in a "device" they didn't make) can infringe. However, the idea that some patent holder would sue Microsoft customers for patent violation strains the imagination. I suppose as a business tactic someone might do it to hurt MS, but the negative feedback they would get would dwarf any harm done to MS. Maybe after they sue Microsoft first, but I can't imagine Microsoft a) letting it get that far and b) leaving the patented technology in place.
    2. Copyrights
      FUD. Unless you make copies and distribute them to others and harm the owner of the copyright in doing so, you don't infringe. I see no way a Microsoft customer can be liable for copyright infringement without also infringing against Microsoft.
    3. Trademarks
      FUD. If you just use Microsoft products, and don't display the products to others, I don't see how you can violate some hypothetical third party's trademark.
    4. Trade secrets
      FUD. The only person who violates a trade secret is the one who reveals it. The person who learns the secret is not liable for trade secret violation. They may be guilty of doing illegal things to get the secret, such as breaking and entering, but they aren't on the hook for trade secret violations.
    5. Contracts and licenses
      FUD. If you don't sign a contract or click through someone else's EULA to run a MS product, these don't affect you.
    6. (What The SCO Group Has)
      It's not known what this is, since it occupies a different reality from our own. OT: the Novell Board of Directors understood in 1995 that they retained the copyrights to UNIX after the sale of the UNIX business to the Santa Cruz Operation.
    --
    sigs, as if you care.