Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Open Source As Legal Time Bomb

Posted by Zonk on from the boom dept.

Hwyman writes "TechWorld is reporting on the latest attack on open-source software by the Microsoft-backed Alexis de Toqueville Institution (ADTI). Many here will remember ADTI's previous assertion that Linux Torvald was NOT the true father of the Linux kernel. Taking the stance that OSS is in conflict with IP law, ADTI president Kenneth Brown states, 'After a brief glance at much open source software development, it becomes readily apparent that a number of open source practices directly conflict with best practices associated with protecting intellectual property.' With references like 'open sores software,' it's easy to believe that ADTI might be somewhat biased."

8 of 372 comments (clear)

  1. Not serious journalism or research by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I doubt if anyone takes these people seriously.
    If anyone does, well, they're just not too bright to start with.

  2. Biased, with a point by nurb432 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    While they may be biased, and slant their findings, the concept of 'a problem' is valid.

    Even if nothing ever comes to light from IP/patent problems, it can ( and is ) keeping some companies away from adoption of anything open source out of fear of lawsuits.

    Remember, even if you win, the fight can easily cost you enough to put you out of business..

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----
    1. Re:Biased, with a point by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      > it can ( and is ) keeping some companies away from adoption of anything open source out of fear of lawsuits.

      And while they're doing that, they're losing $$$ to the companies that DO leverage FS/OSS to do it better, cheaper.

      The "Boo-hoo -- don't use FS/OSS!" is going to fly about as well as "Boo-hoo -- don't buy foreign cars!"

    2. Re:Biased, with a point by Vellmont · · Score: 5, Insightful

      True, but IP/patent problems are a concern with ALL software, not just open source. If you don't think IP theft happens in corporate software, think again. There's been several very public lawsuits where code theft from one company to another happened. Patents are just ammunition to attack or defend yourself against other companies. All the Open Source community needs is its own patent ammunition to protect itself.

      Even MS had some issues with developers using non-licensed tools to create.. sound files I think it was. We only find out the issues that go public. How many IP/patent issues do we never hear about because of the closed nature of closed-source software and private companies?

      Pure ADTI bias aside, I think this is the most dishonest thing about this article. Open Source will likely have to solve the problems differently than private companies, but the issues aren't a whole lot different.

      --
      AccountKiller
  3. Oh my gosh! by Noryungi · · Score: 5, Insightful
    You mean... You mean... Microsoft has not realized yet that FUD does not work against Open Source? Wow. I am shocked, shocked!

    Let's see what happened in the last few days:


    What's next? SCO will publish another inane series of press releases on its latest strategic re-deployment?

    It's FUD, people. Nothing new here. Move along. Film at 11, and could the last person out of the building please shut down the lights? Thanks.

    Sheeesh. They should have figured it out by now. What do they teach MBAs these days anyway?

    Seriously, though, this is another attempt by a really worried company to smear the competition. A clue for Microsoft: it did not work for IBM. It won't work for you.
    --
    The right to offend is far more important than the right not to be offended. (Rowan Atkinson)
  4. Liars can still tell the truth. by Tiger4 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Unfortunately there is a point here. The non-traceability of the Open Source process leaves any given product open to contamination from copyrighted/patented IP. Most projects don't have tight checking of who did what, and they definitely don't know where the contributor got the input. That is an invitation for trouble. Worse, a project could have an "IP bomb" placed inside it by an agent of a less than scrupulous SCO, er... proprietary company that wants to stir up trouble later.

    On the good side, it is a problem that is easily fixed. Traceability of the code base back to the contributor can be implemented, but it means some sort of centralized repository AND use of good tracking tools. IMO, no major distribution, and definitely no kernel, should leave the foundry without knowing who touched it.

    --
    Behold, this dreamer cometh. Come now, and let us slay him... and we shall see what will become of his dreams.
  5. Why feed the troll? by orin · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Posting this on Slashdot is just feeding the ADTI troll. Effective advocacy isn't about dealing with every troll lobbed your way. If these guys really had a legal time bomb they'd use it as a basis litigate. It isn't as though people today ever really show restraint when they think they have a cause (however dodgy) that will stand up in court.

  6. Re:They don't just lie about Linux. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Why play their game? Closed source by it's nature is competitive. Why does everyone feel a burning need to prove that linux is superior. Don't play these games.

    Lets not fight, use and develop linux, and leave the fools to use inferior closed source products.