Slashdot Mirror
Symantec Sues Microsoft, May Delay Vista
AuMatar writes "Symantec filed a lawsuit against Microsoft over patents on the volume management technology in Vista. They're seeking an injunction to stop Vista from being sold until the suit is completed. Given the recent Supreme Court ruling it should be interesting to see if the injunction is granted, since Symantec does produce software which uses the patent. If it is granted, expect MS to settle to prevent another Vista delay."
I would completely disagree with that needing symantec bit. In fact, I find that XP systems run BETTER without their crap. Just slap on one of the free antivirus out there and remove any pre-installed crapware and you're good to go.
Instead, Symantec is alleging that Microsoft stole trade secrets from them (this is the contractual violation part) incorporated them into Vista (hence the petition for injunction).
Patents come into the picture because Symantec is also alleging the Microsoft filed for patents on this technology, claiming to have invented it itself.
Symantec purchased Veritas. Veritas wrote the volume manager (Disk Management in the mmc) that is used by Windows 2000 and later. If you check the registry, you'll find reference to the veritas volume manager.
Dynamic disks, shadow copy, etc. are all Veritas (now Symantec) products that MS licensed. Presumably MS are pushing something along these lines that'll interfere with Symantec's storage management market, so Symantec are getting nervous.
TFA is light on details as to exactly what bits are violating an agreement, but given this stuff has been around since Windows 2000 it's fairly safe to say it's reasonably well embedded into the OS - lots of stuff depends on those hooks now.
Holy sh*t! All of the comments in this thread about Symantec being worried about Microsoft's anti-virus product!
You apparently have forgotten that Symantec now owns Veritas -- you know, the company that had probably the most-used volume management software out there? Need I remind you that Veritas Volume Manager has been a part of Windows for many years? Windows 2000 even had VxVM incorporated into it. When you have a 2000 or XP disk that is configured as "dynamic" instead of "basic", you're looking at a Veritas Volume Manager disk, not a straight NTFS/FAT32 disk.
Even the article itself (emphases mine) says:
Microsoft said in a statement that the suit "stems from a very narrow disagreement" over terms of a contract with Veritas to license volume management technology, which allows operating systems to handle large amounts of data.
Apparently, Symantec either thinks that Microsoft has misappropriated the technology that they use in Veritas Volume Manager and incorporated it into Vista without giving Symantec that they want or they're using this as an excuse for a money grab. Either way, this has nothing to do with Microsoft's anti-virus product.
The Overrated mod is for reversing inappropriate, positive mods, not for voicing disagreement with a post.
SAM became NAV--Norton Antivirus for Macintosh.
My understanding is that the first virus ever in the wild was for apple computers.
This is an interesting timeline It lacks some details but gives an idea of importance virus played in history.
Microsoft is in a position to place antivirus/spyware apps into their OS. Symantec makes ~50% of all revenue from NAV. This lawsuit isn't much more than corporate blackmail. Microsoft agrees to not bundle their AV, or otherwise completely screw NAV, and Symantec agrees not to tie up Vista in court.
http://blog.seattlepi.nwsource.com/microsoft/libra ry/symanteccomplaint.pdf
IIRC, MS isn't planning to bundle anti-virus software with Vista. Their own package, Windows Live Onecare, is a yearly subscription service which itself bundles spyware and virus protection, as well as general system maintenance tools. A challenge to Symantec, but not the bundled threat other MS products have been. Windows Defender, their anti-spyware product, is available as a free download (and I think it will be bundled with Vista), and all of the maintenance tools with Onecare are pretty much already possible with tools built into Windows, but MS's anti-virus software is not freely available, and the Onecare bundle is an attempt to make all of the tools a bit simpler and more straightforward.
Myself, I've been using Onecare for a few months now after having used Norton products for several years. I'm pleased with Onecare and will likely continue to use it under my Windows install. I can't say just how good its protection is, being a Smart Internet User, I very very rarely come across anything that requires protection. But from what I can see Onecare is nice, and I do like handling a number system maintenance issues in one place.
I love my sig.
Nah, it isn't about selling more symantec products. It is about making sure they get money from microsoft products being sold because they contain symantec ideas.
Microsoft is the one that realy bit the hand. They attained an antivirus company and talked about giving it away with Vista. I'm not sure if thats still the idea but it would signal symantec that netscape syndrome could be happening there. Now if symantec can make Vista expensive enough because of licensing fees, they will generate the same amount of profit for each vista sale as they would for nortan antivirus sales. It is a win win situation for symantec because even if they lose the delay, they will still be able to profit from the code in Vista as well as drive the price up wich could make it almost too expensive for people to adopt willingly.
Now this poses big problems for microsoft who has big plans on thier DRM sales tied directly into Vista as well as other programs. I guess alot of thier Vista or windows XPsp2 only software might start getting a port back if it goes this way.
Funny, Symantec/Veritas Foundation Suite is deployed on at least one server in just about every major corporation in the world, and it's mainly aimed at *nix servers that are running FC. Turns out they are in fact making money off more than just MS, who'd a thunk?
If I had a dollar for every RHEL/Oracle/Veritas DMP setup I had to troubleshoot I could've retired already and I've only been doing it for a year...
Reminds me of stacker.
Though that worked out well for the primaries of stacker ($600 million settlement, or something like that), the company failed during litigation........
One wonders if Microsoft is trying to "phase out" Symantec in the same fashion. Obviously, they believe it is cheaper to litigate/settle than license or buyout.
WhiteWolf666 an exBush supporter. All you new-school,compassionate,save the children Republicans can rot in hell
My understanding is that the first virus ever in the wild was for apple computers.
That may be true but what percentage of the virii in the past 10 years have been for Apple computers? Look at the last 3 years and tell me if you can find a non-MS virus to hit the street... OK, I will accept that there have been some for mobile phones etc. but for PCs???
I love stacking my barbecues in the shed at the end of summer - you can't beat a bit of grill on grill action.
The judge has the power to issue a preliminary injunction before trial if the judge is convinced the circumstances warrant it.
All the Supreme Court patent decision really did was tell the lower courts that in patent cases, when they're deciding whether to issue an injuction, they're supposed to apply the same standards as in other cases.
To justify an injunction you're supposed to show that it's necessary to avoid "irreparable injury." If being awarded damages at the end of the trial will end you up in the same position as if an injunction were issued, the judge is not supposed to issue an injunction. (Obviously the rule is vague enough to provide a lot of wiggle room.)
look at the scattered remains of former companies at the hands of Microsoft it seems a wonder any company would enter into partnerships with them
Nothing new here. Those who do not remember history. . .
Here's how GM (the 800 pd. economic gorilla before Microsoft, ya know "What's good for GM is good for the nation.") built up their manufacturing base back in the day:
You find some little, privately owned fabricating shop in East Podunk or something and offer them a contract to make a few widgets. Visions of Rolls-Royces and gold leafed ice cream begin to dance through the owner's head.
Over the next five years or so you gradually increase the number of widgets you have them make for you while constantly patting the owner on the back and telling him what a great job he's doing and how you'll be friends and partners forever.
At this point 90 to 100% of the company's business is producing widgets for you.
Now you suggest that perhaps friends and partners isn't the best business relationship and offer them a lowball price for the company, promising to keep on the founder (who risked all and spent years sleeping in the warehouse; allienating himself from his wife and kids in the process, to build his business) at standard wage for a minor plant manager.
If he takes the offer you keep him on for a year or two for transitional stability, then replace him with a home office exec.
If he doesn't take the offer, you cancel all orders, instantly bankrupting the company and you buy it from the receiver at pennies on the dollar.
You keep the owner on as a minor plant assistant manager for transitional stability and when he dies of alcoholism/heartbreak in a year or two the home office exec whose thumb he has been under runs the show.
It's all just straightforward business really and pretty old school. There's no actual animosity on the part of GM in the above. Microsoft's "innovation" in applying this strategy is the way they manage to make simple predatory business relationships personal. They don't simply want to acquire you with minimum fuss and expense, they want to pound you in the ass if you don't accept lapdog status.
GM simply wanted to acquire. Microsoft wants to dominate.
Come to think of it Bill Gates "innovates" in business by following the Minor Keith plan. They're ultimately after turning the world into a collection of Software Republics.
KFG