Slashdot Mirror
OSDL Says Patent Threat to Linux is Receding
blacksilver writes "The chief executive of the Open Source Development Labs (ODSL) has said that the threat facing Linux from software patent-infringement claims has receded.
From the article: 'Lots of people who hold a lot of patents have looked at this issue, and nothing's come of it ... There's always been a suspicion that some of them [the alleged infringing patents] were held by Microsoft, so this could be an issue ... our customer advisor people speak to people, including major customers who run both Windows and Linux, and they say it's not an issue,'"
But, our customer advisor people speak to people, including major customers who run both Windows and Linux, and they say it's not an issue
Are customers who run Windows and Linux really the right people to be asking these kinds of questions? Shouldn't they be commenting on Microsoft (and other companies') actions instead of random customer opinion? Seems kind of random.
Copyright threats against linux are still alive and strong, right?
We wouldn't want the OSDL to spread such FUD among SCO investors!
Am I open minded towards open source, or closed minded towards closed source?
When people eat the FUD, they don't necessarily believe it. Instead they just add this to the risk pile: "Aww heck I don't want to have to possibly go to court...".
Engineering is the art of compromise.
So they say that Linux potential violates 283 software patents? Now I do not know that they went through every software patent, but that is WELL below the number of issued software patents I am sure, so was there really much of a threat anyway? Besides that there is always the potential of any patents being invalidated in court even if it ever happened.
I do not see why a corporation would be scared from Linux by this potential though. You are talking about a patent infringement that would affect the companies and people distributing Linux and not the people using it. I really think everyone sort of got scared about this at first, but realized the threat was not as bad as everyone was originally stating.
"Some days you just can't get rid of a bomb."
Among the companies that don't support the Patent Commons initiative are Microsoft, HP, and Oracle. The article mentions the claim that Linux potentially violates 283 patents. Unfortunately the list of infringements was not released, but wouldn't the OSDL be wise to do some research in order to determine the validity of the claim? Then they would know for certain if any of the supposedly sullied patents belong to the above corporations.
But hey, his people speak to people.
The deepsea floor cracks with the rumbles of Microsofts declining sales as software becomes "good enough". As the developers wander out into the seabed picking up the flopping fish of patent infringing code, the wave of lawsuits builds out of sight, until it crashes in with its weighty force, SCOuring all in its path. Stick to high ground and be safe!
Watashi wa chikyubutsurigakusha desu.
The entire boogeyman of some company destroying Linux via a patent suit never really threatened most of us in the first place.
Why, you might ask?
Because most of us don't really care. Patents count as a silly abstract nuissance for business-folk, not for hobbyist developers. Treble damages? 3 * $0 = $0. No doubt some lawyer will point out that other dangers exist, but really, I (and I doubt most of us) really lose sleep over the idea that our use, or even code contributions, of Linux may violate some obscure submarine patent waiting to spring out at us.
Or to look at it another way: If the USSC banned Linux tomorrow due to it infringing some patent - How many of you would run out and buy XP to "fix" all your now-illegal machines?
The patent threat is held in check because of a deadlock of sorts. MS has some patents, but then again so does IBM, Oracle, etc. The first use of patents by MS against Linux will trigger retaliation from MS competitors. If all of the patents were enforced simultaneously, the IT industry would grind to a halt.
.44 Magnum, armed robbery becomes nearly impossible. Some people might want to take all the guns away, but it's easier (and almost as effective) to make sure everyone has one.
The best we can hope for is a massive proliferation of patents. The more, the better, so as to create gridlock. USPTO likes it this way -- more power to 'em.
Imagine that patent as the paper equivalent of a handgun. They can be used for crime or defense against crime. Armed criminals are a real problem -- they can rob people at-will. But if EVERYONE is packing a
Linux is de-centralized so it cant ever be killed like other companies can by patents and other lawsuits, just ask SCO, you'd literally have to win against hundreds of companies worldwide and even then people are always going to be modifying the source on an individual level. It's everywhere.
Patents are not a shield. They are a sword. When a competitor tries to stab you with his patent, you draw out your own and, all else being more or less equal, he may agree to leave you be rather than risk you killing his business.
Patent "trolls" are not competitors. They are file-drawer companies that don't make anything and don't sell anything. You cannot kill a troll's business with your patent sword because they have no business.
Patent pools are no defense against trolls. Linux companies are no safer than anyone else when the troll demands a piece of their profits.
"We reject as false the choice between our safety and our ideals." --The American President (20.1.2009)
I am not a lawyer, but I can make a good guess that if enough of such cases (prior art in open source for existing patents) are handled by courts, it will go on to tell the legal and the lawmaking branches of government that the patent system is obsolete. It will create legal precendents for favoring open source over patents in the future, as the open source is actually effective in promoting innovation, unlike software patents.
Are there any lawyers out there?
Yes, there are many. That's the problem.
Maybe you shoudl be able to patent, the hole source code of a program,
Why? The whole source code is already protected by copyright
What is needed now is no protection shield against software patents.
What is needed now is an American equivalent to the European campaign effort. It is possible to abolish software patents and this is the way to go.
So where is the US campaign?
From a recent interview experience I had, it is my opinion that Microsoft isn't interested in true creativity, they want C.S. degreed weinees who can recite definitions of low-level development constructs... This left such a sour point to me, that I am now moving my servers *away* from Windows, even though my software is properly paid for, and licensed... they won't be getting *more* money from me...
I also won't be recommending any more 6 figure purchases based on their technology.
Michael J. Ryan - tracker1.info