Ballmer Won't Dismiss Idea of Suits Against Linux

An anonymous reader writes "According to an interview with Steve Ballmer in Forbes, Microsoft is open to the possibility of filing patent suits against Linux in the interest of their shareholders. Ballmer said: 'Well, I think there are experts who claim Linux violates our intellectual property. I'm not going to comment. But to the degree that that's the case, of course we owe it to our shareholders to have a strategy.' Microsoft filed more than 3000 new applications for software patents in 2005 and already owns more than 4000 patents, including many patents on fundamental, but trivial technologies, like double clicks."

Comments

More FUD from MS

[carsonc]

More FUD from MS Desperate times call for desperate measures. What to say, Microsoft is getting desperate. To be coming out making direct statements like this show's that Ballmer is worried about his future; he really screwed up with Vista.
Daniel Lyons has been suspected of being a SCOX puppet for Microsoft for quite some time now. And people have been suspecting that Microsoft has been funding this sort of talk in the SCOG - IBM case as well. Can't wait for the discussion on Groklaw

Re:More FUD from MS

[gentlemen_loser]

If companies are incorporating patented MS technology into their Linux distros, then why should he rule out going after them? Anybody has to assume they will if they think they have a case; it's only FUD if they do it without a case.

FUD=Fear Uncertainty Doubt

They are trying to slow the adoption of Linux in the corporate world by introducing fear of lawsuits and thus risk. Risk, in the corporation (as anywhere else) is undesirable and therefore avoided. By definition, this is FUD. They are abusing their dominate market position (again) to slow adoption of other systems (Linux) in order to compensate for problems the company is currently dealing with.

In my opinion, they should have been broken up years ago.

Re:More FUD from MS

[Ungrounded Lightning]

If companies are incorporating patented MS technology into their Linux distros, then why should he rule out going after them? Anybody has to assume they will if they think they have a case; it's only FUD if they do it without a case.

The point of a FUD attack is to scare off customers (or investors, or partners, etc.) by hinting that their is a problem with the competition but without giving enough information about the hinted event for the listener to determine that the hinted-at problem exists.

In this case they're hinting that there is misappropriated technology from some unspecified items from their large patent portfolio in Linux and that at some point in the indefinite future they'll come down on Linux vendors and pull the rug out from under their customers. Yet they don't say when, don't specify what patents, don't specify which Linux components, and so on.

It's a vague threat. It can't be falsified (i.e. potential Linux adopters can't effectively determine whether there are actual violations or if Balmer is speculating through his hat). It would tend to scare away customers, partners, adopters, contributors, etc. Any claim of wrongdoing can be deflected by pointing out that the ACTUAL STATEMENT is just a truism of business policy, not a deliberate attack on Linux and its community.

If it really is just a truism of business, it would not be newsworthy. If Microsoft is actually gearing up for a patent fight it would be very newsworthy. Yet it makes headlines, without announcing the launch of an attack, or anything but the non-newsworthy truism.

So IMNO the fact that he made the statement at all meets the above definition of a FUD attack.

Re:More FUD from MS

[_Sprocket_]

It's not impossible for Linux or Linux users to be in the wrong by, e.g., infringing MS's patents.

It's not that Linux developers are above and beyond the law. By all means, if something like this has been done - point it out. But first know that it has, indeed, happened... and be willing to back the claim.

The "FUD" comes from the wink-wink-nudge-nudge nature of the statement. Note that Ballmer does not confirm nor deny. But he does attribute all manner of dire consequences to these claims. Assuming they're correct. But you can't tell - you don't even know who the "experts" are... much less what the claims are. It's classic FUD.

A more appropriate way of handling this question would be either "we are investigating these claims", "we are not aware of any such case at this point", etc. These are not FUD statements. However, I understand that Ballmer just isn't that kind of guy. A spade being a spade and all that.

Who is or represents Linux?

[Anonymous Coward]

Who exactly do you sue? Linus Torvalds? Stallman? A bunch of working class coders who send in patches in their spare time?

Microsoft is flailing

[jimmyhat3939]

I just wish Microsoft would stop with this behavior and actually work on their core products. It's been nearly 5 years since the last major revision of Windows--it's getting kind of ridiculous.

I think the best analogy for Microsoft's current situation is when Apple was struggling to come out with Copland. At that time, Apple flailed around a lot trying to figure out ways to make money. Ultimately, they concluded they needed to find a way to start all over with their OS. Microsoft will wind up doing the same, eventually.

In the meantime, let's hope their flailing won't harm Linux.

In other words, stifle if you can't innovate

[bushboy]

These patents simply stifle competition and therefore advancement, so it stands to reason that Microsoft, being the kind of company they are, will practice underhanded methods such as this.

They are simply incapable of any real innovation and never have been, so they stifle and steal ideas and use marketing muscle to sell it as thier own.

I'd say these methods have a limited lifespan, as is clear with Vista.
They are being beaten to the punch due to lack of this innovation, by Apple, by Google and by Linux.

No amount of FUD or threats is ever going to stop that, time to move over microsoft, as your going to be played at your own game and your going to lose.

Re:Not FUD, sound business tactics

[TechnoGrl]

This ain't FUD people, this is business as usual.

The really, really sad thing is that you are absolutely correct.

A perfectly good reason why they must go

[MikeRT]

and by they I mean Microsoft's management. At a time when their status quo has lead them to a debacle with Windows development, all Ballmer can think of is lobbing bombs blindly at the enemy. He's proven himself to be no real tactician nor to have a good eye for managerial talent.

I own stock in Microsoft and want to see these asses go. Stop wasting my money on threats against Linux and start getting Vista out. You idiots cannot get blood from a turnip, which is about what your suits against OSS developers will amount to. The only way to keep the value of my stock up is to develop a product that brings in more revenues, and suing Linux developers won't do that.

Fuck you Ballmer, Allchin, etc.

-From a shareholder who sees right through your wag the dog campaign to CYA.

Re:Not FUD, sound business tactics

[heatdeath]

They're sound business tactics, but that doesn't necessarily mean they're right or make sense. Leveraging a monopoly is also a very sound business tactic.

Can't disagree with Balmer here

[ChrisGilliard]

He didn't state that he's sure that Linux has violated Patents, but he's saying that if they did (as some experts say), they would be forced by their shareholders to take action. This is entirely true and will always be true in every situation. If someone materially infriges on a corpoations patents and there are substantial damages to the corporations ability to make money, the corporation has a duty to it's shareholders to enforce the patents. Balmer really doesn't have a say in this matter he has to act.

Re:The F word

[carsonc]

Lyons hand fed him this question. It was something he wanted to talk about. You think that he would have commented otherwise.

Re:The F word

[hunterx11]

But it is FUD. The term has nothing to do with the accuracy or fairness of claims; rather it is used for claims intend to discourage people from using a product regardless of the merit of the claims. Here, Ballmer is by his own admission only speculating that Microsoft could sue. Why not simply look into it and sue or not sue? Because this way, he can pre-emptively discourage the use of Linux.

Re:Not FUD, sound business tactics

[justsomebody]

What Ballmer is saying is this: if (and that's a big if) there's patent or IP imfringement anyhere in the Linux kernal, they'll look into it and take legal action if they have to.

Unfortunately, too late for MS. If they did that 2-3 years ago, they might've even succeded. It would be easy to pick on standalone home developers, a free open season on Linux hackers.

Now? Not really. Too many corporations are getting money from Linux and they will fight for their piece of pie. If they would proceed with this steps, all they would achieve is corporate fight without any rules, but no gain.

One case that proves what I'm saying. OIN http://linux.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/11/10/ 1321238

MS is just too late with this idea as every time.

Should MS not enforce their rights, they're hosed and the stockholder get's POed.

Unfortunatelly, MS stockholders stand just as much chance as SCO.

It's a sound business decision and, frankly, so obvious that it should not have even been reported. It falls into the "duh, no shit, sherlock" category. So what else is new? This ain't FUD people, this is business as usual.

In bussines, timing is everything. MS has missed this oportunity (as every other time). While I agree with your saying it isn't FUD, it is not sensible reality either. It would like MS is declaring the start of the last battle in this war (First they ignore you, they they laugh at you, they get scared, they fight, they lose), where MS is not fighting, but pissing against the wind. And this is business as usual to.

Re:Not Sound business, total FUD...

[justsomebody]

Yeah, you're right, Microsoft should sit around and allow its IP to be stolen, if that's the case, by a bunch of self-satisfied nerds. Maybe once you're old enough to have a job, you'll understand the ways of the real world.

Which IP? TAB handling? Virtual desktops? Wearable devices?

99.9% of MS IP is shamefull stealing from long existing projects. Name one real IP invented by MS.

I have a sad message for his shareholders

[Qbertino]

Linux/OSS isn't playing Microsofts game.
Sue all you want. Open your war chest of patents and fire away, Have IBM join the fray and fire back with an army of lawyers and tons of prior art. Drag Donald E. Knuth to court and have him confess that he came up with large parts of the stuff everybody claims to have a patent on. Force people to join patent ammo interest groups and have 10-20 wisecracks come forward who've managed to pass "pattern-matching" and "bit-vectors" passt the patent office clerks, ready to sue MS to chunky kibbles - or step down for a mean xx million sum.
Be it that in the end, 50% of Linux is actually 'illegal code'. 'Illegal' as in 'patent-thought crime'. Illegal as in 'may never use FAT' and 'may never use CF12xx encoding for characters.'. And so on. But never forget:
Linux/OSS isn't playing Microsofts game. It's not about money. It's about nice computer stuff that's fun to lots of people. It's about software that does interesting things, not about making money. It's made to work without money. It's about PHP. Mozillla. Python. Blender. Not about Money.
MS won't survive as a software-only company. They can sue, burn 5-10 billion and set back desktop Linux by a decade. And they have to if the shareholders demand it. But they can't win. Because OSS is not playing their game. OSS has more IT expert manpower than MS can even dream of. And it's machinery is fuled by passion, not money. That's what scares the piss out of MS.
"... then they fight you. Then you win." QED.