Slashdot Mirror
Ballmer Says Linux "Infringes Our Intellectual Property"
Stony Stevenson writes "In comments confirming the open-source community's suspicions, Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer Thursday declared his belief that the Linux operating system infringes on Microsoft's intellectual property." From the ComputerWorld article: "In a question-and-answer session after his keynote speech at the Professional Association for SQL Server (PASS) conference in Seattle, Ballmer said Microsoft was motivated to sign a deal with SUSE Linux distributor Novell earlier this month because Linux 'uses our intellectual property' and Microsoft wanted to 'get the appropriate economic return for our shareholders from our innovation.'" His exact wording is available at the Seattle Intelligencer, which has a transcript of the interview. Groklaw had an article up Wednesday giving some perspective on the Novell/Microsoft deal. Guess we'll have something to talk about in 2007, huh?
Who merged the Linux Genuine Advantage code into the tree?
Come on, speak up - I know it was one of you.
liqbase
This coming from the guy that's requiring SMB2 in Vista so that people using Samba on Linux server's can't use them for file storage.
That rhythmic thudding sound you hear is the sound of every computer professional on the planet simultaneously laughing their balls off.
I'll be honest, we're throwing science against the wall to see what sticks. -Cave Johnson
I haven't seen patent one infringed upon let alone a whole balance sheet's worth so you'll have to excuse me if I seem a bit pessimistic about you strong arming me into using SuSE.
That's right, you can spin it anyway you want
It's not just any old regular FUD, it's new improved Microsoft FUD.
Enjoy your $500 million, Novell.
My work here is dung.
SuSE is dead.
Microsoft infringes on our patience sometimes, as well.
biopowered.co.uk - catalytically cracking triglycerides for home automotive use since 2008. Just say no to big oil!
If you want a job done right, do it yourself, eh Balmer? SCO just wasn't up to the task.
Infuriate left and right
Linus,
Please find enclosed a pre-paid airline ticket to Redmond, WA, where I'd like you to give a talk to our employees on the benefits of open-source development.
Seating will be provided.
Respectfully yours,
Steve Ballmer.
GNU/Linux infringes on our IP
To quote South Park: Novell just got F'd in the A.
Pretty much any Linux geek will tell you that's a load of jibberish, not unlike the SCO case. But, should it come to Microsoft and Novell going to court over this, couldn't this still spell trouble for Novell? A lengthy trial isn't cheap (and neither are out-of-court settlements). And the worst case scenario - maybe this could even spell trouble for Linux itself? It certainly makes for some excellent FUD for Microsoft to feed to the CIOs and managers of the world.
With Microsoft's track history, I wonder why people trust them at all. Especially when the stakes are high, like in this situation.
Basilisk Digital
So just how much code from the *BSD (unix) projects have shown up in M$ products.
Then they threaten us! Seems we have the dogs biting the hands who fed them.
But seriously, when the first SCO thing came about, the Linux people said, "We don't want to infringe on anyone's IP, so tell us where it we are infringing, and we will rewrite the code."
Same applies here. Open source takes a little of the fun out of these things, now doesn't it?
If you can't beat 'em sue 'em.
Buy a copy of MSWindows and put the box under the monitor.
As a nation (USA) we need to nip this type of behavior in the bud. While F500 companies have made Linux an important part of the data center (too important to be incumbered), startups have used Linux and open source to drive most of the innovation and change over the last 5-10 years. The first internet boom people used venture capital to buy tons of proprietary hardware and software. The sustained growth has come from white boxes, open standards and open source.
The economy is on the line when open source is threatened.
Microsoft does not inovate.. they immitate.. Microsoft has very little ground on inovation other then the way they make money. Balmers pockets cant get any fuller. Jeez this irritates me.
Freaky Schitt always happens to me... WHY God WHY!!
Alright, enough of this bullshit. Isn't there some kind of Libel suit that can be filed about this kind of garbage? I know I, as a private citizen can't go around telling newspapers that the Coca-Cola company kills a kitten for every can of drink they sell, without getting sued nine ways from breakfast. Why is Microsoft any different? If they've got something, let's see it, if not, can't they be forced to stop spreading FUD on pain big nasty fine-y death? Surely Redhat, and the other corporate Linux entities have some interest in trying this?
Hey Ballmer...I've got your intellectual property...right here
{gesture to groin}
This doesn't work as well in the electronic world as it does in person, does it?
TDz.
Ballmer added later in the speech "You'll notice that BSD also infringes on our Intellectual Property. You'll notice that the BSD network stack is identical to the one Microsoft created. Anyone who thinks otherwise has been brainwashed by the Great Satan"
When it is shown to be Mono that is infringing?
Of any comapany that asserts that another is violating its intellectual property, but refuses to say exactly what. SCO and :CueCat both tried this and were widely ridiculed.
Not clear how, if Windows code had been magically grafted into the Linux kernel, that such Frankencode would a) work and b) go unnoticed. Linus himself is the ulitmate commiter to the kernel.org sources, no?
As a society, we need to stigmatize people who say such wrongheaded things in public, and clueless publications that circulate such tripe.
Get thee glass eyes, and, like a scurvy politician, seem to see things thou dost not.--King Lear
Coming from the company who stole the gui from PARC, the IP stack from BSD, the new theme from Apple, the ...
I see a lot of things in GNU/Linux that I don't see in Windows. Like a modern scheduler, a UNIX/POSIX compatible standard set of libraries, a competent collection of userland tools (coreutils), a free and commercially viable set of compilers, various desktop window managers based on X11, etc, etc, etc....
If GNU/Linux *did* copy things from Windows (like the shitty scheduler, memory manager, lack of user land tools, etc) I wouldn't use it. I might as well run Windows.
I think we can all sit back and laugh at MSFT for squirming into oblivion. Vista will be a hoot of a failure. I for one am going to sit back and laugh.
Tom
Someday, I'll have a real sig.
Microsoft?! Innovate?!?! *falls out of chair, sides hurting*
Busted! Linux geeks are criminals!
Terrible karma and aiming lower, which in this environment of one-sided reason, is higher.
Without that essential information, Microsoft are behaving in a commercially-inappropriate way. Intimidating and destructive to creativity.
I need the chance to way either that the patent does not apply where I live; or that there is prior art; or that I will do something in a different way. Or to find a patent of mine (or of my employer's) that they would like to cross-licence. I also need to know when the patent expires.
"Talk is cheap, show me the code!"
'get the appropriate economic return for our shareholders from our innovation.' - as much, as it is innovation, and not speculation on market dominance.
Servant of karma
it appears that with the passing years the microsoft top brass is getting old, and surprisingly losing their sanity before their due time.
arent they already aware that eu is bashing them because of their similar behaviour ?
do they think that eu will just let them force people to use their own 'partner''s distro just like that ?
i can see fines raining down like hell.
Read radical news here
I see nothing innovative from MS period, what is he talking about. What patents or copyrights does the linux kernel infringe? If anything I have installed infringes MS "IP", I want to know so that I can remove it. Never mind vague threats, show us where the problem is or STFU!
MS Windows infringes thousands of patents too, funny how he doesn't mention that.
With this license agreement, Novell has a license to put MS patented technology into their Linux. Is it safe to permit Novell engineers to submit code to common Linux repositories? It seems to me that they would need to certify that none of their code contains any of the MS IP that they now have access to. Unless MS is willing to identify which portions of SuSE are covered by their patents, this could be difficult.
I love when someone creates something better (be it a product, a technology, etc) that it automagically becomes "Infringement".
Mantra of the 2000's - "If it ain't yours, and it's better than yours...it's 'Intellectual Property Infringement'"
I hoped that Novell/MS deal was really something meaningful, not yet another PR/Marketing stunt from Microsoft. Putting all that "protection racket" bullshit aside, which I can buy a little bit, this Balmer speech asks for more serious investigation, because it just roars "antitrust".
user@ubuntubox:~$ stfu This server is going down for shutdown NOW!
good thing this doesn't affect most of the world
no software patents = teh win!
A use for a robotic chair!!!
Yeah, you kids may not remember this one, but MS STOLE Stac Electronics' disk compression scheme. MS ended up paying Stac something like $170 million for this theft. Yeah, MS should talk about stealing IP -NOT!
MS is a company. I don't MS would say something like that without checking with the lawyers. I'm sure what Ballmer says is technically true. After all, MS must have so many patents. Whether those patents should have been granted is another story. They might have patents on stupid, obvious things with tons of prior art. MS can't go after Linux directly because IBM undoubtedly has a larger patent portfolio. So they get SCO to plant seeds of doubt in every PHB. Now it's their turn. The SCO thing was merely the opening salvo.
Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
It all makes sense - MS is starting to worry. Not about the "boom in linux in just a few years" - that has been "just a few years" for over a decade now. What they are worried about is the "Big War" on the very immediate horizon. Computing is about to undergo a huge revolution.
Now that (as far as a lot of the top end guys at MS are concerned) Vista is out of the door they are looking at what is next. Customers (home, but most especially business) are not going to pay for another OS - many might not even buy Vista. There is little else MS can put into an OS that sells - stability and modularisation don't sell. They tried the "eye candy" route for Vista - because if they didn't it wouldn't sell one copy. The thing is they can't do the same thing again "Windows Corumo - just another coat of paint on the same OS" - nobody will buy it.
The future? Subscription based economics - they don't have to produce another OS - they just continually charge for the current one. That too goes for MS Office etc.
Why the current turn by MS - because linux really does cause them difficulties in that business model. $30 per month for windows or $0 for a flavour of linux.
The big battle is ahead - the business model that has held firm with computers (both software and hardware) over the past 20 years is being broken up. This can be proven in the easiest way imaginable. Ask yourself this question. As a member of the "bulk" of computer users (ie not high end gamers or 3D designers - home "write an email and watch a dvd"'ers or business "write a spreadsheet or create a presentation"er's) - why would you *want* to buy a new machine/new OS? - the old one does everything just fine - super fast and relatively trouble free. That has not been the case for the past 20 years - it is now.
I don't understand completely what Intellectual Property Ballmer is talking about. SMB? Or is there more? And is he right about Linux using MS's IP, or is he just bullshitting?
-- Cheers!
This is getting really old and although many here will probably disagree, it will eventually have an impact. I can just hear my legal department now "We keep hearing case after case of Linux infringing on someone's IP. We better ban it. Microsoft is a big secure company that would never do anything like that and if they did, there is no way the effects of it could ever impact the end user"...Oh wait.. .. Scratch that.
--- Liberty in our Lifetime
Quoth Ballmer:
So they need lots of developers, developers, developers, developers to keep up ...
I hear there's rumors on the Slashdots
Theyre hurt by Linux so bad and without any other defense than resorting to
FUDge. Not a smart move Ballmer, with hundreds of thousands of Linux evangelists
out there putting that into perspective for the customers. Linux is taking over
hard and the Solaris people feel it (even though if you got Solaris youre imho
downgrading). Then theres IBM, ORACLE etc. to contend with... theyll whip your
lawsuits out of court until you "blue screen".
With the monopolist pressure they are forcing my relatives, my employers, my contractees, my government to use their own software and wont let them bail out, limiting me on what i can or cant do with my audio&visual equipment in my own house, increasingly deciding what i can or cannot see on the internet, oppressing my open source community, suing people to the extent of harrassment, causing my relatives, friends, close ones to get into pain over their lacking&incapable&insecure softare and me to run fix-up errands for them, trying to funnel cash into decision makers to influence political decisions against my democratic wishes.
In short, they are using me and all the people i know for their own personal profit against their wishes.
i request that microsoft cease and desist immediately
Read radical news here
Even if LINUX was infringing upon Microsoft's intellectual property, I wouldn't want to draw too many people's attention to this issue. Based upon the security issues plaguing Microsoft, it would give the impression that LINUX understands Microsoft's intellectual property better than Microsoft.
"Does this wine taste funny to you?" -- Socrates
Hey Ballmer - suck my balls.
Linux is not an Operating System. It is a kernel dot .
I gave up with the idea of an useful sig...
Baller saying "the fact that that product uses our patented intellectual property is a problem for our shareholders" implies patent infringement, but the truth is probably that they've freely contributed some of their ip into interoperability and networking with other operating systems, and this has been picked up by Linux. The problem is that nobody owns Linux, so they can't leverage this. The next best thing is to pick one of the commercial distributions (Suse/Novell) and turn them to the dark side.
Now, the idea is to make it so that if you want Linux to fully work with Windows, you'll need to use Novell's distribution. Or at least that is the idea.
qualifies as a clear and present danger. OK, ya'all lawyers. What law can be invoked by a class action to get him to put up or shutup, and to explicitly list the patents that infringe? This is clearly market manipulation at a minimum. He is also claiming that all linux end users are in violation of the law.
What is it about monopolists that they end up thinking no one else could possibly be as good as them and their team, that no one could possibly compete, that no one could come up with an idea on their own?
Why do monopolists assume they own the world when their fragment is a paltry slice compared to the whole?
Why would someone whose anti-trust investigation mysteriously evaporated shortly after the Bush election be flapping their gums when the Democrats are on the rise and looking into any and all events for influence, connections, and blame? Instead of worrying about Linux, Ballmer should be worrying about the spectre of renewed anti-trust investigations.
The Linux code is up for public review. The straw-dog SCO attempt to tear it down is all but done. Let Microsoft publish their code and identify the purported IP conflicts. They don't and won't because they can't, and they know it.
I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
I want to see the list of what Ballmer and cohorts assert is infringed in Linux. I want to see what components of the Linux OS are supposedly infringing. Until I see that, Ballmer's words are so much FUD and bullshit that I'm ready to vomit.
Hey, Steve, Apple of the 1980's called. They want their reactions to your OS stealing their ideas back.
/* No Comment */
If you believe him switch to BSD, if you don't, sit back and enjoy the popcorn.
-- Sig down
I'd feel some regret for some of the folks at Microsoft, now that their leaders have started a war they cannot win, but then, if *I* worked there, I'd leave, taking my soul with me.
OK, so even if MS *does* hold software patents that are *actually* valid (or are not declared INvalid for a significant length of time) and that cover significant elements within Linux; what then? Can they seriously expect the rest of the world (like, say, India, China, Brazil, and most of Europe) to stop promoting, developing, and using Linux, or even seriously pause in that effort? Get a life, Redmond, it isn't ever going to happen. Those nations will push Open Source forward even harder precisely in order to escape your grasping digits. You can't stop the Penguin Army(TM).
MS may be able to cause some annoyance and inconvenience to some folks in the US with this attack, but there are several limits on how far that'll go, and it WON'T go far enough. At most, it'll slow Linux uptake slightly while further blackening MS reputation everywhere (invent new category of ultra-darkness here...)
Ultimately, the US' competive position in the world would be what suffers most in the long run even if MS were to succeed. Open Source proponents will simply route around the problem or ignore it, and US efforts to prevent "infringing" Open Source use will be about as effective as the RIAA's effort to stamp out filesharing. (I *was* going to say, "As effective as Prohibition," but that's too high a standard.)
"My strength is as the strength of ten men, for I am wired to the eyeballs on espresso."
"limiting me on what i can or cant do with my audio&visual equipment in my own house"
The rest of this is good and all, but about this particular item: How is Microsoft doing this unless you were one of the drooling early-adopters who bought a Zune earlier this week? I know they aren't responsible for that damn region system that makes DVDs a hassle.
Where were you when the voynix came?
Microsoft patented the Operating System.
Anything can, could, and will happen.
MSDOS was originally a clone or CP/M with copyright problems of its own.
l
"Bill Gates saw the business opportunity of a lifetime. He obtained rights to a cloned design of CP/M, QDOS, from Tim Paterson of Seattle Computer products, licensed it to IBM, and MSDOS/IBMDOS was born. Later, IBM discovered that Gates' operating system could have infringement problems with CP/M, contacted Kildall, and in exchange for a promise not to sue, made an agreement that CP/M would be sold along with IBMDOS when the IBM PC was released. The price set by IBM for CP/M was $250 and for IBMDOS it was $40. IBM's decision to source its primary operating system from Microsoft was the beginning of the end of Digital Research's days as the world's largest manufacturer of software for microcomputers."
http://labs.pcw.co.uk/2006/11/microsoft_bows_.htm
This reminds me the mob asking for protection money.
Interoperability... Are they are putting in decent VT100 terminal support for a mere few 100 M$ ? Sure.
I hadn't the slightest objection to his spending his time planning massacres for the bourgeoisie... (P.G. Wodehouse)
Even their puppet SCO claimed similar things, and after 3 years in Court, they haven't proven anything. Just that they can spout FUD at every turn.
Now MS is running scared, and wants to stop, or at least slow down, the Linux Juggernaut, and are hoping their usual bully and FUD tactics will work.
So let them prove it!
"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe." Albert Einstein
Honest question here.
What if it does??
With all these new software patents being handed out, plus the Patent Office both being swamped and not very savvy about these new patents, what if MS actually holds some patents that the Linux kernel infringes on?
What then?
---- The price of freedom is eternal vigilance. -Thomas Jefferson
I think that RedHat and/or IBM need to issue a press release like this very soon:
Something like that would be nice to nip this in the bud now. Just fewer typos and spelling errors.
[End of diatribe. We now return you to your regularly scheduled programming...] - Larry Wall in Configure from the perl
When SCO started their show, at least they took the effort to invent a possible scenario of how their IP could have leaked to Linux kernel (using AIX as proxy). For Microsoft IP being gone to the wild, it is necessary that somewhere someone has violated some NDA, be my guest Mr Ballmer, point this person/company and sue his pants.
Now i have little question about M$ patents in US (hopefully in EU they are still illegal, so no issue here):
A patent being intened to give *limited* monopoly to its holder, how much senes does it makes to allow a company that is a defacto monipoly(found guilty in an antitrust case) to inforce its patents ?
Guess we'll have something to talk about in 2007, huh?
No... after 2 years of SCO, Politics, FUD and irrelevant stuff (that certainly wasn't news for nerds), I rather unsubscribe from the Slashdot RSS feed.
You're saying Microsoft is entering its 'Dotage'. :)
The sabre-rattling is over. That boom you just heard was the first salvo being fired. Oh, "it was just a test", he'll say, but we know better. Linux, in all of it's different flavors, has left the hacker realm and poses a real threat.
Gandhi said: "First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win." Mahatma Gandhi
I say "bring it on, bucko."
A clever person solves a problem, A wise person avoids it. -Einstein
You are right on the crucial strategic point. Nothing will ever be disclosed, just like in the SCO case. He may actually count on the outrage that will follow to help him make the point (to business customers) that MS is the strong one here. That Ballmer and MS take this gamble, and it is a huge gamble to frontally attack public knowledge and innovation in a free society (just in the middle of the European Commission thing), may actually be a diversion attempt to hide their current weaknesses and the beginning of their decline. Apple is on the rise, Vista is not going to do so well, Linux is doing brilliantly. Let's not play David against Goliath, let's play public knowledge and innovation in a free society against a last century style robber baron. Ballmer fits the part wonderfully.
Just read the topic. Past that, I have nothing. Mods, be gentle.
APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
This is likely a good thing. Contrary to what we'd like to believe, Linux distro's are undoubtedly infringing on a few Microsoft patents, however trivial they may be. If this causes those to be documented, and motivates distro's to quickly remove/recode the given functionality, then we have come one step closer to having linux be exactly what we want, FOSS and without any licensing concerns.
Considering the incredible gains OSS has made over the past few years, and the fact that it's taking a bite out of the M$ Internet development and deployment platforms, I'd expect nothing less from the guy. Perhaps he genuinely believes that he can force a majority of Linux users out there to deploy a M$ sanctioned and supported Linux distro.
One thing that he'll never be able to change, though. It generally takes considerably more technical skill to create a web application and implement it with the M$ combo of ASP/MS SQL - whereas a weekend hacker can put somthing together in PHP/mySQL. As a result of this, the amount of OSS available, from blogs to full CMS and portal systems, in LAMP vs. M$ is about 8:1. Just check SourceForge or HotScripts. OSS is driving the past few years' explosion of dynamic content websites. Of course he thinks M$ is threatened. He should realize though that when you examine the history of the Internet (back to about 1982 or so), bullying has generally been counterproductive. Exhibit A: PirateBay.org (try a tracert - it's funny).
Go ahead with your shortsightedness Ballmer and start sueing.... Four things will happen
1) I will buy your stock and it will rise (please read below before you flame me...)
2) Wait for the US Congressional hearing(s)...
3) Wait for Patent re-write laws to finally pass specifically tailored to defang M$..
3) Sell the stock and watch it tumble...
Any company that resorts to this type of tactic clearly shows they are on the way down. MS is no innovation company, and most question if they ever were. I never thought of them as a patent trolling company, though...
Also, there is only one thing that big company execs fear more than going to prison, and that is sitting in front of a congressional hearing while old men grill them on national TV.
Ahhhhh, so Microsoft owns IP that's in Linux, eh? So that explains why they paid Novell All That Much Money.
Don't piss off The Angry Economist
These events show why Red Hat's policies on non-free software are so important. If they were including the bits and pieces of non-free software in other distributions such as Ubuntu there would be a lot more possibility of infringement.
- Most of their patents contain obvious ideas as well as prior art. If they went to court wielding these weak patents, they would probably lose the case and the patent could be revoked.
- Microsoft is not going to sue customers of Linux because it doesn't make sense. It would be analogous to a person who has been a victim of car theft prosecuting the unwitting buyer of the stolen car instead of the known car theif who stole it. If they did go after anybody, it would be the distributors of Linux.
- Microsoft will not sue the distributors of Linux because Microsoft has a world-reknowned monopoly on operating systems and it would face many sactions and reparations from the governments of many countries, especially the governments who use Linux.
So there is little reason to buy into the Microsoft FUD. If anything, this is a sign that Microsoft is beginning to fear losing users to Linux. Between the number of people switching to Linux and Mac OS X, I would say that they have every reason to be fearful of what could happen within the next 10 years.You'd think with all the negative press about Vista and with M$ not wanting to support XP after (insert whatever date is) that the transition FROM XP would be a fantastic time for people to say: "Hey, let's try Linux, it's free anyway."
Wouldn't it be helpful if instead the people would say: "Hey, let's get Vista, I wanted to try Linux as it's free, but I hear there are additional complications and it's based on Windows anyway (*this is what they're trying to insinuate*). We'd best pay to be on the safe side."...Helpful to at least ONE company, anyway.
But, yeah... interesting timing.
So if Linux includes some of Windows's code, and Linux is GPL'd, does that mean that Windows is GPL'd now? That would be so great if at the end of whatever trial results from this, it turns out that Microsoft GPL'd themselves.
stuff |
"Linux 'uses our intellectual property'"
Time to put up or shut up Mr. Ballmer. Which bits and who's OS.
davecb5620@gmail.com
I thought that was a return to Novell share holders. Just sematics I suppose.
Excuse me, but please get off my Pennisetum Clandestinum, eh!
Funny thing. SCO tried this same thing about 3 years ago. It started with a reporter "viewing" the evidence and then reporting it as being a credible violation. After 3 years, NOTHING has come from it. I suspect that we will soon see a reporter reporting that they have seen numerous IP violations from Linux, but will not show the evidence and will soon say that it is credable. My guess is that it will be Dvorack or some other idiot inside of PC Mag.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
You predicted this back in 1999. It just took Microsoft this long to actually implement this plan.
Who should file? Isn't it up to MS to file against companies and individuals using Linux before any legal resolution can be reached?
GJC
Gregory Casamento
## Chief Maintainer for GNUstep
Really, he is a genius. Think about it.
IT Shop: We need some robust 24/7 uptime servers.
Ballmer: Great, I'll send you some Windows licences. Misa or VasterCard?
IT Shop: No, we need a well-architected, secure OS that's designed for networking.
Ballmer: Great! I'll send you some Vista licences. You should see Aero. Wow!
IT Shop: No, in the last 10 years, Windows has cost billions of dollars in lost time because of security flaws in Microsoft software.
Ballmer: Um... well... er... heh...
IT Shop: We're going with Linux.
Ballmer: Did you know? All the good parts of Linux were designed by us. Novell even admits it. We release so much great code every day that we let the hippies have some for free. So, in fact, when you buy Vista, you get all the good parts of Linux. Plus... you get Aero! Wow! Will that be Misa or VasterCard?
Rich And Stupid is not so bad as Working For Rich And Stupid.
I know squat about writing programs; but being a user, I know everything about Usability. That is, fool proof ease of use. Is there no institution/organization/person that exists right now to help Open Source/Free software developers/makers produce Usable software? I can't imagine how Open Source/Free (or Open Source/Royalty Fee) software will not dominate if...if the software is easy to install ...... easy to use and does what it is supposed to do .... extremely well.
Foe example, for over 10 years I have been looking for Usable software to stream quality video over the web in a P2P fashion with no central server. Why doesn't it exist? Obviously both Apple and Microsoft has been spending millions (billions?) making sure the later doesn't happen. But so what!
While the OIN as a repository for patents is a good idea, there doesn't seem to be a huge amount in there now. What they need to do is get a couple of patent filing lawyers and automate the process for open source developers to get patents; you send them the system/process/idea blah and they file the patent for it.
Turn it into a patent factory, get patents that shouldn't be approved (like everyone else) and build up an arsenal that can be used to threaten microsoft back.
If this had been done a few years ago I'm sure we would have plenty of patents that MS infringe upon.
All Microsoft has to do is pick their fights carefully to avoid making say, oh, IBM a party in any of the lawsuits. Nail the right company using linux for infringing on your invention, and legal departments for other similar companies who can't afford to fight a war with MS, or those with little prospect of winning, well... they're not stupid.
Even a settlement that isn't punative from a money perspective, but just a pain in the ass to impliment, will have an effect on how companies build out their networks. Even if it does nothing more than drive businesses to Novell's services, it's a victory.
Code is copyright, invention is a specific method (or set of methods) to achieve some end. Microsoft has a ton of patents, and a need for a ton of patents. If the offending party isn't indemnified by their own thermonuclear option or that of a partner that's also an owner of a nuclear patent umbrella, it's a cold dark unforgiving night. Keep in mind, Microsoft, can fight, win, and seem magnanimous all while crippling someone's business simply by providing a solution that allowed them to avoid destroying their credit rating, but which is still more than violent enough to make a point.
Don't trust in the Courts' ability to interpret arcane technical conflicts reasonably. The fact that light coming from inside a private residence may require a warrent to view with a technological aid is somewhat offset by other decisions that make it legal for SWAT teams to not warn and then kill innocent people for typographical errors made by disinterested clerks.
What? You don't believe me? Watch this.
"You'll get nothing, and you'll like it!"
Linus Torvalds was accused of stealing IP from Microsoft in an interview earlier today. In response he proceeded to hurl a chair at the nearest computer running Windows.
Not that i'm saying that copyright infringement is good (even when i thing software patents should be abolished) - but if the developer that implemented the code that infringes on the so called Microsoft patent does not live in the USA, or any other country that recognizes this patents' validity, what happens?
No. See my post above. It is an attack on public knowledge. IBM will help but we need not to let a private entity fight this alone. Let's have our (we the people) institutions have a say in what they think of these robber barons. Public knowledge and innovation is the key to the progress of a free society. To let a private entity fight it alone would be like Churchill and the US staying at home while the USSR fights Nazi Germany, then showing up at Yalta and asking their share of the pie.
Well, that's what they paid for. Anyone thought they threw all that cash away just to replace Vista with SuSe?
"Blah blah blah." - [citation needed]
- Look like a good guy - hey, we're helping people out with this LUNIX interoperability thing.
- Scare the crap out of big companies - the wording he used very carefully makes it sound like anyone using Linux is violating SOX
- Introduce MS patented code to SuSE in the name of interoperability. I don't know how they are going to get around the GPL patent restricitons, but this agreement with Novell is a violation of the GPL for the same reason.
This has nothing to do with MS choosing one Linux over another. It is about finishing the job that SCO couldn't.All this patent noise is hiding the real agenda. Microsoft is having Novell create a Linux compatibility layer for Windows to replace the aging/ailing Services For Unix/Services for Unix Applications. Services for Linux in Vista/Longhorn by SP2. Novell has the skills to hack Linux interface into Windows, since this is how Netware integrates. Remember FreeBSD has a Linux compatibilty layer so there is an existing shim already that can be adapted.
When I was young, I had to rub sticks together to compute.
So, if Linux is "infringing" on Microsoft's IP, why haven't they come forward sooner and said something? They've had years to bring this to everyone's attention; funny how it's just now a "problem".
:)
Besides, where is this supposed "infringement"? Is it in the kernel? Is it some piece of OSS? He did say "Linux" and not "SAMBA" or "Apache" or mention any other software. Although, I think it was funny how he seemed suprised how many at the conference had Linux servers.
I don't reply to Anonymous posts; if you have something to say to me, identify yourself or I won't reply.
(for the benefit of those who didn't RTFA)
Didn't SCO already did that? Why can't Microsoft be original? What's next; are they going to try to erect a huge sunshade over Seattle? Steal the head off of a statue of George Washington? Come on now, Microsoft, you can do better than that! But then, I suppose this is so typical of your idea of "innovation."
Seriously though, if they claim Linux infringes on its IP, it's 99.999% likely that every other *nix variant out there does as well, since Linux is merely a clone of Unix. So, go after the likes of Sun, IBM, SCO (Yeah, I know SCO and Microsoft are lovers, but bear with me here), the BSDs, HP (HP/UX and Dec Unix), and so forth. I don't think even Microsoft has the resources to prove to the courts that an OS architecture which predates theirs by over a decade infringes on their so-called "intellectual property."
The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
Let's face it, Red Hat and other Linux companies simply do not have the financial resources to tackle Microsoft in this absurdity when it (at it will) end up in the courts.
IBM however, does. And despite what you think of IBM, they have been a huge, HUGE supporter of Linux; I honestly think IBM wants to remove Microsoft products completely from their business, they simply cannot just yet. IBM has already fought SCO over Linux patents and their lawyers should be prepared for this sort of battle.
Microsoft thinks they have a deep patent library? They have no fucking idea what Big Blue has up their sleeve.
Caffeine is my anti-drug!
Duranin - A NWN2 Roleplaying Persistent World
Both IBM and Intel will have a different view of course :-)
Step 1: we have lots of patents, but we wont sue you. ( and keep building the list up for later )
Step 2: We have lots of patents, but we wont sue you if you arent making money. ( continue to build )
Step 3: get hooked up with a Linux vendor.
Step 4: "gee, you guys are infringing us" "we never realized how bad it was"
Step 5: All out legal assult.
If you didnt see this coming you are stupid.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
Doesnt have to be 'windows code' to be a problem. Just concepts can get you into trouble.
Remember the trashcan debacle?
---- Booth was a patriot ----
MS did actually write a check this time, instead of just rearranging Novell's living room.
Build a man a fire, he's warm for one night. Set him on fire, and he's warm for the rest of his life.
The BSD license doesn't require much, but it does require that a copy be included in anything that uses the code. Has anyone seen a copy of the BSD license included in Microsoft products? I understand they make substantial use of BSD-licensed code. What is the penalty for that violation? How much of Microsoft's intellectual property is really Microsoft's. How many of Microsoft's patents are similar to their recent years' patenting of sudo (that had been in use for well over 17 years)? How many of Microsoft's patents are based on ideas in code they acquired having BSD licenses?
Folks, we are getting into a massive prior art battle here. Microsoft couldn't create problems for Linux through SCO, so now they are trying to do so directly.
This, btw, was Ballmer speaking to predominantly to his customers. He led off by asking who was running Microsoft stuff and who was running Linux as well. Reportedly, a "surprising" number of hands (described as many outside of the quote) went up as well, and Ballmer asks about interoperating problems, some of the audience were having them, and on he goes with Microsoft's solution. While the ip in Linux is a legitimate lede, isn't another take-away that Linux is getting into the datacenter whether or not Microsoft cooperates, i.e., there are problems Linux is solving? And didn't he tell his customers that they are infringing Microsoft's ip if they were using the wrong flavor of Enterprise Linux? And isn't he saying that in order to help solve the interoperating problem, RHEL-using customer of ours, we're going to sell you some vouchers so you can get the other brand, waste time adapting to its differences, have you write off that support subscription to RedHat and make you go get more money for your budget, and that way, after we huddle with Novell, you won't have interoperability problems later (maybe). So, everyone keeps asking the FOSS world -- what's your reaction, what are you going to do. Well, Microsoft customers who also use Enterprise Linux or who are thinking about checking into it, what are you going to do, now that Microsoft has decided that it should you cost you more money to do your job?
Couldn't that bitch wait a few days, and let us enjoy Linux on our PS3s? We finally get a branded PC without Windows preinstalled and like 5mins later this! ;)
I'm getting sick and tired of these veiled threats of potential patent-lawsuits. Let's cut to the chase. Microsoft in one corner, Red Hat, IBM, Sun (maybe) and few others in the other corner. Let MS attack Linux, and let's see IBM and others counterattack, and demand injunction to shipments of Vista and few additional pieces of software. Let's watch the participant rip each other to shreds. I bet that Microsoft would end up hurting more, and maybe, just maybe the powers-at-be will see the damage software-patens can cause to companies, individuals and economy.
Seriously, bring it on!
Lesbian Nazi Hookers Abducted by UFOs and Forced Into Weight Loss Programs - -all next week on Town Talk.
We scream that we don't like this, but you know we do. This is our soap opera. We like it because we can sleep well; there isn't a doubt in our mind that in the end FOSS will prevail. Sure, Microsoft will cause some type of damage; probably having a few companies continue to use Windows, but it can't stop the creature that is now the open source community. I mean, really, how can Microsoft, or anyone else for that matter stop this boulder that is us? It can't be stopped. They are doing exactly what every fish out of water does: try to use the breath they have left to get back in. vl@d $:
do they think that eu will just let them force people to use their own 'partner''s distro just like that ?
For the moment at least, the EU does not even recognize the IP in question.
KFG
Double clicking is their IP, after all ....
Just the fact that you can share or communicate between Linux/Unix and Windows servers is the source of the problem? That is what I read in the article. Just being able to read and write to the Windows file system is stepping on their legal toes? But don't worry because we put 'a lot' of work into the IP and MS is being compensated. Whew! That was close. /sarcasm I would love to see this explored in detail.
....... Thus ends my attempt at wit or whatever
The most amazing thing is that there are people who thing the "Gates Borg" icon is lame and no longer relevant. ARE THEY KIDDING???
http://www.linuxcommand.org/man_pages/bsod1.html
We all know that Windows most innovative feature is the BSOD. They want thier royalties.
Enjoy,
It's just the normal noises in here.
Microsoft Windows infringes on our intelligence.
Surely fraud could be defined as lying for the benefit of the liar or the liars comnany.
Seriously, Linux contains MS patented code is a serious allegation of IP theft and if untrue, claiming such a situation exists is an act of fraud in it's own right. Hence if the SCO case collapses, McBride and Co. are guilty of fraud, If Ballmer can't provide evidence he's also guilty of fraud or at best, making fraudulent claims.
Hmmmmmm..... Deep fried and look like Squirrel.
This move by Microsoft was pretty obviously in the works when they announced their patent cross-licensing scheme with Novell. But the Novell deal isn't absolutely committed yet. And Microsoft, like other submarine patent strategists, usually waits awhile to announce their target, to fool more people into forgetting the way they set up the target, and fool more people into thinking the original transaction was executed for its intrinsic business merits.
So this whole campaign to screw Linux with patent attacks looks desperate. And since the Novell deal isn't absolutely committed, the strategy is in jeopardy, without its foundation properly laid. With IBM already whipping Novell's last created Frankenstein, SCO, into harmless foam after years in court, Microsoft's attempt looks less likely to succeed every few days. When will Oracle come out of the woods? Does RedHat have a patent arsenal to match its brand and budgets?
--
make install -not war
...got the T-shit, coffee mug, beach towel, bumper sticker, and a time-share condo.
MS will never explain this far reacching claim. If they did, and if the claim was real, the infringement would be mitigated. They want to keep the threat alive.
Since SCO has made a shame of this "Linux Tax" idea, I doubt anyone is going to listen to Chicken Little this time...except Novell. Novell was paid to be stupid. Good bye little SUSE.
Being a standard does not imply being patent-free.
For example JPEG and MPEG are standards covered by patents.
GP might be right. I checked, and MS actually has patents on Mono, except Microsoft licenses them royalty-free.
But in order to work Mono needs technologies not covered by the ECMA standards (see for example).
Of course, they're not infringing in Europe, where software patents are (still) illegal...
I have discovered a truly marvelous proof of killer sig, which this margin is too narrow to contain.
In other news... Ballmer Says "The moon is made of cheese and the earth is flat"
[The Universe] has gone offline.
Software patents are valid as long as no one challenges them. If MS sues someone with enough money they run the risk of getting a patent overturned. If they included that patent in a cross patenting deal that might not be something they would want.
If companies like IBM and Novel stay in the linux buisiness and more buisinesses adopt linux the likelyhood of a lawsuit deminishes.
This also shows the need for an open source patent system where people can donate there patent wich will then be GPL-ed. That way it's MS that would need to proof a patent isn't valid and that's always better then the other way around.
Another thing in our favour is the fact that microsoft is in the legal crosshairs all over the world for abusing it's position. If they start blackmailing buisinesses with bogus patents that would put them even more in the spotlight. There comes a moment when all those fines start to hurt.....even in a wallet that's MS super sized.
Increasingly, it seems as if corporations are coming to the conclusion that not only should they have the potential to earn money from something, but that they have the right to. This is irrespective of practical considerations such as "Does the claim make a bit of sense?"
Microsoft's claim here is another in a flurry of claims that sits alongside the net neutrality debate, the royalties Universal collects on each Zune sold, in addition to the royalties they collect on the music purchased to play on the device and the push by various private weather services to make it illegal for the U.S. government to release taxpayer-funded weather data for free.
Sorry, but if your business model isn't working, if you aren't bringing in as much revenue as you would like to, don't run around holding your hat out demanding more cash just because you want it. Shut up, fix your business model, create a compelling product or service and compete.
SUSE, putting the 'sue' and 'use' in opensource since the MS merger.
With 'US' caught in the middle.
Have you read the moderator guidelines? Well, have you, PUNK? (and I want a Karma: Gnarly option)
but it does require that a copy be included in anything that uses the code
Umm, thats not how it works. You are required to include one small string of text. Microsoft does that, and you can find it in the binaries.
Don't you think someone else would have found this over a decade ago if they were violating the license?
a) Ringo Starr (thank you John, Paul, and George)
b) Dr Phil (thank you Oprah)
c) Steve Balmer (thank you Bill and Steve)
d) All of the above
If, as Ballmer asserts, Linux stole from Microsoft, and Linux is both communistic and a cancer, one must draw the logical, self-loathing conclusion. ;-)
M$ was in my office last week, pitching some remote backup and branch-office solutions. They brought up that they've made improvements to SMB to make it 'less chatty' over the WAN, so users at the far end of a 512Kbps or T1 circuit see better performance. Their solution is SMB2, which they said is built into the kernal on Vista and also requires Longhorn server.
I blurted out 'so that means you're locking out the Linux/Samba users, huh?' They made some comment that it would be backwardly comptable, but it was obvious that they're going to try to ensure that the protocol isn't reverse-engineered the way SMB was.
Since their main business strategyis to copy someone else's product (Zune this year), I find the claim of 'IP" to be a bit far-fetched.
So, if there is "infringing" IP in Linux, is there a liklihood that similar infringements have been made in Apple's code?
Really, I'm not trolling. It sounds like Ballmer is saying that MS has so much of the system tied up in IP that effectively everybody who writes an OS which can interact with MS software is infringing. Does Apple have cross licensing?
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
This article and the $$ of microbraniz PI**** me OFF! So i am willing to put my money where my mouth is in the defence of FREEDOM! http://www.pledgebank.com/MicrosoftVsLINUX What about you? SPREAD THE WORD!
The lack of specificity is the most damaging. Clearly msft's game is to flood the media with vauge innuendo about linux being a legal mine field. A lie told often enough is the truth. If msft were specific, their claims could be evaluted and appropriate actions taken.
Msft = the fud factory.
> In comments confirming the open-source community's suspicions,
> Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer Thursday declared his belief that
> the Linux operating system infringes on Microsoft's intellectual
> property.
Well, look at the facts.
* Linux uses Microsoft's technology of taking input from a keyboard and displaying it on a monitor.
* Both Linux and Windows run programs that can help you create documents and run a webserver.
* Both Linux and Windows need "programs" written in "source code" that must be "compiled" in order to operate. Even worse, these "programs" need to be downloaded either over the Internet or from a CD.
* Both Linux and Windows communicate with computers that use the Windows OS.
That's pretty damning evidence! The only technology Linux hasn't stolen yet is Window's ability to bloat up with malware causing the system to come crashing down and displaying the Blue Screen of Death.
The crack journalist failed to mention how exactly linux is infringing on Microsoft's Intellectual property. Can someone clarify this?
Conserve Oil, Recycle, Boycott Walmart
for a long time, it will be both of them fighting YOU, not them fighting each other. Remember, they are partners now and out to stomp everyone else. ( and plenty of cash to pull it off )
Once the rest of the linux landscape dries up due to fear or outright legal war, then microsoft will just pull the plug on the partnership. and *poof* goes novell.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
...that between the Linux kernel project and Microsoft Corporation, only one of those entities has been convicted (repeatedly!) of patent and copyright violation. I'll leave it as an exercise for the reader to guess which it is.
It suffices to say, I think the kettle just called someone black.
Tom Caudron
http://tom.digitalelite.com/
-Tom
...and IBM attorneys are affectionately known within the organization as the "Nazgul."
The track record for Microsoft's legal department is really not that good. IBM will probably tear them apart if they really go at eachother.
> If I write a scientific article, I don't believe I am liable for citing work which later turns out to be plagiarized. Why should it be any different with code?
Because if Novell submits infringing code, and others start building off it, modifying it that effort is potentially wasted. Its not about being liable for citing plagarized work, its much more akin to basing your research program off results that are fraudulent. You run the risk of spending millions of dollars chasing down some 'cold fusion' type idea because the publishers of the journal failed to prevent bad knowledge being integrated into the body of scientific knowledge. That is why the decision to include code into Linux needs more control than it has, and that is a great liability that I'm not sure the community can afford.
The Justice Department defeated Microsoft. Boies was the prosecutor.
Boies firm has gone on to lose some high-profile cases, Al Gore's supreme court appeal being the most prominent.
If Linux is really infringing on Microsoft's property, why did Microsoft pay Novell a bunch of money instead of the other way around? Seems like Ballmer is pushing more FUD to me, and I don't think the timing is at all coincidental: It's clear at this point that SCO is going to lose big. If Linux comes up squeeky clean, that's real bad for Microsoft. If Linux is borrowing from anyone's IP then it would be UNIX ... not Windows. If they can't even prove it for UNIX, Microsoft is going to have a heck of a time.
jim frost
jimf@frostbytes.com
According to Ballmer, "the appropriate economic return for our shareholders from our innovation" is about negative 348 million dollars.
That number sounds a bit small to me; I think Novell should have at least held out for an even $400 million, an apology, and a promise from Microsoft to never try "innovating" again without adult supervision.
But really, this intellectual property stuff is serious business, and I don't think any Linux users want to fall afoul of the law. If Novell had to pay negative hundreds of dollars for each of their users' infringement of MS intellectual property, I think us Fedora users (and you Ubuntu users, and Gentoo users...) should all be willing to step up to the plate and pay negative hundreds of dollars per license too.
...now here's what I think:
Microsoft's lawyers have selected Novell/SuSE because they are a Linux competitor and a long-time adversary for Microsoft in the server market. Threatening massive and financially crippling Intellectual Property litigation, Microsoft proposed a way out for Novell/SuSE. "Pay us royalties on our IP and we'll leave you alone."
How much more of this before we see "The United States of Amerca versus Microsoft" again for anti-trust? Is this anti-trust or monopoly abuse behavior? I don't know. I seems pretty wrong to me though. Reminds me of "protection money" schemes.
Brazil directed by Terry Gilliam
One of the characters is a guy (played by Robert De Niro) who runs around repairing the horribly broken machines that everyone's required to use, but are forbidden to fix. He's hunted down as a terrorist.
Seemed pretty crazy when I first saw it.
Doesn't seem so far fetched anymore.
When exactly has Microsoft shared any of its profits with its shareholders? They have something close to 100 billion in the bank. I don't recall any dividends. Where's my piece?
So who exactly are they shaking the money down for, then?
What effect will the Patent Commons project have on a patent assault by Microsoft? Also, will the newly formed Open Inventions Network also affect the way Microsoft approaches this issue?
I mean, both of those organizations essentially grant rights to their patents royalty free only to companies that don't sue F/OSS projects. If MS starts a suit, wouldn't they have to contend with both of these patent holding portfolios as well as the enormous portfolio of companies like IBM who have a vested interest in seeing Linux succeed?
I get the feeling (though I could be dead wrong) that MS gets far more benefit from the current ambiguity and the occasional stirring, scary statement than from actually pursuing a legal remedy.
Tom Caudron
http://tom.digitalelite.com/
-Tom
They're the lawyers Al Gore used in Florida in 2000.
Remember the statistician from back then? The French guy, IIRC? The one who tried to use statistical analysis of a previous election to prove that column 1 on mechanical voting machines had a higher error rate? Remember how BSF fucked that up so badly because in the election they used to try an prove a higher error rate in column one on the voting machines, three or four of the different races in that election were all in column one? With the US Presidency in the balance, BSF had never actually looked at a ballot from that election and were caught unaware by that. Either that or the BSF lawyers deliberately lied to the statistician.
Now, how does that behavior fit with all the crap BSF has pulled in SCO v. IBM?
It fits right in. Face it, BSF is slipshod and sleazy. If Al Gore had used real lawyers he'd probably be President. BSF just got lucky in the Microsoft case. Microsoft was so arrogant that even Boies could win.
Methinks the OED needs to put a picture of David Boies in their work as an example of "shyster".
Funny though. You know MS must be worried when they start trying to put a little fear into their customer base. Just a thinly veiled threat that there might be legal / financial exposure down the road with "non MS" solutions/options. Boy, it must be so much fun to be a MS corporate user, having your primary IT solution threatening you! Sounds almost like a protection racket, doesn't it? "Stick with us, 'cause if you don't... Well, bad things might happen..."
As if I needed it, yet another reason I love Linux, Open Office, Firefox and Thunderbird == they're not from MS!
--- Just another Code-Monkey
The appropriate thing for Microsoft to do is indicate to Linux developers where the offending code can be found so that it can be remove (if indeed it does infringe). Microsoft has chosen the same route that SCO did. They don't want you to remove the code and remedy the problem. They want you to pay.
except they control a great deal of money going through several key states with loud members of congress. And with the WTO(which every western economy is a part of), the US has the right to call for protection of its IP. It would seriously hurt the commercial distribution side of linux.
I'm a fan of linux(if only I coudl get it to work on my current computer...) but there aren't many companies that are grabbing the latest fedora install(or any other brand) and just running it. Most get support through a commercial vendor. These are the people that microsoft can move. it helps them keep their death grip on the pre installed OS market. And it means that either apple or MS will be used in schools. Based purely on price, apple gets pretty much ruled out of most school systems so you are right back to MS having a death grip on the install base in major countries.
yes, linux will still be run everywhere in the world. its just that it will have lost its commericial backing.
granted, this is only what I think would happen if they could prove quickly adn beyond doubt that they had bullet proof patents that linux was violating(and that are central to the workings fo the linux kernel).
What would probably happen is most commerical distributors would be under fire until all the infringing code was removed and a solid work around was made. unfortunately, if it was important, that coudl take a lot of time(especially if it required rewriting a great deal of software). Now, I'm not much of a computer programmer so I'm not sure what could be that central and not be already known about, but patents do have a way of showing up when you least expect. and that several months it would take to get linux running again would be expensive to the linux take up commercially.
That remark touches a nerve for me. There was a girl in my elementary school who kept taking my lunch money. Worse yet, she took it from other kids in the school.
However, I was the first one to stand up to her, and tell her that she wasn't going to get MY money, and that I was going to keep it!
So she told me to put my tray back, and turned to the next kid in line.
But I could tell that I'd had some effect from the way she kept looking at me funny for the rest of the year, and the whispering of the other kids told me that I'd made an impression on them as well.
Strike while the irony is hot! -- The Freethinker
Microsoft founder Bill Gates is filing an IP infringment law suit claiming a patent on the "echo" command... Do we need any more reasons to not purchase MS products?
Clones are people two.
... what's with the quotes in the headline? The word "infringe" does not appear in TFA.
My turnips listen for the soft cry of your love
Their shareholders should be pretty pissed at THAT kind of money making scheme. But me thinks it's more like their money making scheme with regard to WindowsCE and Xbox. You know, the scheme to take profits from the Windows monopoly( around $10 billion so far ) and keep the WindowsCE and Xbox products on the market so nobody else jumps in and grows to threaten the Windows monopoly/gravy train.
IMO, in the next few years we are going to see the public finally seeing Microsoft for what they really are. After all, FOSS and GNU/Linux must be doing SOMETHING or else Microsoft would not be doing so much in the public and financial markets regarding them. Unfortunately, I don't see very much of this in the United States so it must be going on elsewhere or outside of my sight.
'Gozer' has now, or will soon be, materialized and Novell could be our 'Stay-Puft Marshmallow Man'. Will it be IBM, Oracle, RedHat, or others who bust this party up? Or will the US become to knowns as "The land of Gozer", if it isn't already?
So, "Who you gonna call?".
LoB
"Anyone who stands out in the middle of a road looks like roadkill to me." --Linus
I would expect that since Linux is open source that when a Microsoft engineer does something, then he might use Linux as a reference... which means there are likely significant identifiable blocks of code within the Windows Software that were taken from Linux and other Open Source software and therefore are in violation of the GPL.
If Microsoft sues, then the community should be ready to pump money into FSF and other groups. And we should be ready to counter sue, and subpeona every bit of Microsoft Source code including past versions of the code to find the illegal code in Microsoft products.
MS gives Novell 440 million. Novell gives MS 40 million for "protection." So really, MS gives Novell 400 million, and in return Novell inserts some MS intellectual property into Linux?
1)They invalidate their patents, as prior art will be shown for nearly everything they're claiming is being infringed upon.
2)They'll get in trouble again for abusing monopoly status, and even if the patents were valid, the anti-competitiveness accusations will have a worse effect than letting Linux slide.
This is nothing more than fear mongering - which is not trivial. They want to make people be afraid to use Linux, for fear that Linux will become illegal or lose functionality and they'll have to migrate everything - it'd be easier just to use Windows in the first place. Microsoft knows better than to actually take this to court, but it's not going to stop them from using it to their advantage.
Personally, I wish there were enough force behind Linux to sue MS for libel/slander - as that's effectively what this is. Unfortunately, MS has plenty of lawyers and I doubt at this point that we'll see Novell as part of any class action against Microsoft, so there probably isn't enough money among Linux distributors to hire enough lawyers to make a case.
'Gozer' has now, or will soon be, materialized and Novell could be our 'Stay-Puft Marshmallow Man'.
Bad analogy. Gozer lost and the Marshmellow Man got roasted.
In case of fire, do not use elevator. Use water!
Someone should just patent the process of filing patents. Prior art obviously doesn't matter anymore so this should be quite a simple process. Then we can charge fees of say $1m for any software patents that will be used in closed source software. This money could then go to a fund to further OSS which could file for free. This fee would not be levied if the fee to lisence was free.
Say Ubuntu, Mandriva, or Linspire comes out with a "Winix Edition" distribution - integrated WINE, NTFS support, runs most or all of your current Win32 apps without Microsoft. Set this up as a sacrificial lamb.
Say this is positioned against Vista at half the price (or even free), and the world decides that a Vista upgrade isn't such a good idea.
Microsoft will win a pyrrhic victory destroying this decoy. They might as well fire their PR department if they try it. Their revenues would probably take a nose-dive.
I was overly optimistic (Gucken Wrong!) about GatesBallmer's intentions. I was never surprised about BushRumsfeld intentions even prior to 911. I guess; I expected a little more intelligence and reason from GatesBallmer and Microsoft.They are all incompetent at asymmetric-conflict due to a headuptheass disease mutation.
... until it is too late to do anything intelligent. So first they claim (with their third person delusional aristocratic persona Microsoft/US) greatness and that success is a fact (MS-Halloween Letters and WMD (WhiteManDisease) and fear plague, SCO and Iraq ...). Then when reality shits all over them ... they persist with more of the same re-spun marketer planing that sounds as good to them as the last FUBAR situation. The megalomania of their afflicted personalities causes them to only consider "Stay the Course" as a "real" viable option for humanity.
The headuptheass disease which frequently afflicts politicians, but has been infecting far more wealthy people with a severely diminished mental and emotional capacity to cope with reality. In the business and economic world the debilitating illness is called CorporatistCommunism, but it is frequently misdiagnosed as DemocraticCapitalism by practicing political/economic quacks.
GatesBallmer like BushRumsfeld cannot recognize, or believe, that innovative competition is possible from any adversary
I suspect that whatever (MAD, total destruction) happens between MS and OSS, will involve the metaphorical crashing to earth in flames. MS will rise FIRST from the ashes as a rotting corps zombie, then OSS+OIPR (Open IPR) will rise from the ashes of a pyre as a reborn magical Phoenix. Change is fact of true rebirth for governments and economies.
So, IOW, don't worry, be happy, and don't forget to gucken donate to FSF-GPL, EFF, and other foundations that will lead this great crusade against Microsoft and the CorporatistCommunism [AKA: MonopolySpin Economics] devils.
May the force and good spirits of this earth and humanity keep US safe, in these times of tribulations, from all their demonic hate and MS+RIAA+USA+EU+... concentration camps.
Unaccountable leaders are masters, and unrepresented people are slaves. How do US and EU fare?
I'll admit to using MS intellectual property if they give me a couple hundred million dollars so they don't sue me.
How many chairs need to be thrown in order to say "Infringes Our Intellectual Property" in Ballmerian? :)
My UID is prime. Hah!
Right now Microsoft probably knows what a disaster Vista is going to be and how slow most users and companies will be to adopt it. Anyone who has been paying attention to the developing saga/disaster that is the next Microsoft OS is likely convinced that nothing would do more to increase use of Linux than the release of Vista. So, it would seem this is all part of a nefarious plot to destroy Linux, which they obviously perceive as their biggest threat. What better way to destroy something than from the inside?
Okay, kids, let's put our thinking caps on and figure this one out. Why does MS want to license rights from Novell? Because they know they have infringed on proprietary Unix intellectual property. Since when? Can you say "DOS" (I knew you could)? Okay, so they infringed a little; it's a problem money can fix, right? Oh, but wait, if Novell still owns those rights (not SCO), then they've been legally passed into Linux and are under the GPL. Suddenly, MS has a big problem. You can't buy what isn't for sale, but worse yet, knowingly using it could mean all of Windows would have to be opened up. MS is scrambling to, in effect, retroactively purchase rights to the code they stole. Ballmer's comments are just a red herring. MS is running scared. Remember, you heard it here first.
Testicles, Hair, Uncertainty, Doubt
example.org - powered by Linux!
Ooooh, I see IBM, and M$ going at it, and hey didn't M$ screw IBM with the Operating System...Yeah, that's right they did!LOL This is going to freakin' great!!! Oh yeah, M$ is very frightened of Linux, and Open Source because look at the deal they made with Corel, so that they wouldn't develop Corel Linux anymore.
Since when could Microsoft sue Linux vendor customers? If I make boat trailers and I infringe on your patent for a super-innovative trailer hitch, you can't sue people who buy my trailers. You have to sue me, the manufacturer, right? If that's true, then how could Microsoft sue Linux users instead of suing the Linux vendor? Unless I'm missing some huge legal principle, this is pure FUD to me.
/not/ the kernel, is Microsoft's real target here?
It seems more clear to me what Microsoft's goal was in indirectly funding SCO's patent infringement case. They wanted to test the waters, to see how friendly the legal system would be and to see how easily open source developers would cave. They found it would be a lot harder to actually litigate and that SCO had the most success while they were spreading FUD, before they actually ponied up any "evidence."
Btw, does it seem to anyone else here that Samba and MySQL,
<hyperbole>
Gates: Hey Ballmer, got any ideas how to stop those nasty socialist Europeans from implementing SMB2?
Ballmer: Well, their legal system surely doesn't like out patents. Let's scare them by convincing the largest European Linux vendor into thinking that our patents are infringed.
</hyperbole>
oooo oooooooo oooooo ooshhhhh hhhhhh...
Hey I think this joke I caught belongs to you...
wasn't the premise of the SCO case that linux "pretty much does what SCO (unix) does, but doesn't cost anything"? so how exactly does microsoft's IP get infringed upon? the fact that it's an operating system? because projects outside the kernel (you know, gnome and KDE) have start buttons? or are they claiming to own the idea of making "stuff that makes computers go"?
it was freakin' pathetic when SCO tried to litigate it's way back into significance. to hear that MS wants to do the same thing is... what's the word for "more pathetic than pathetic"?
sarcasm:
-noun
1. harsh or bitter derision or irony.
>> Windows itself is an extrapolation of other people's prior works at best.
This got me thinking... You know, Microsoft can't even claim to have invented windows. Pretty amazing... I had forgotten how late they've come to this game.
According to this link http://toastytech.com/guis/guitimeline.html , it took M$ about 12 (twelve) f* years to finish (?) a product that would "revolutionize" IT.
It's of the "stick a fork in it, it's done" kind.
...of the problem. It's your freakin gov't patent system and how you freaks view IP. If MS didn't do it, someone else would have, like maybe SCO, hahaha. If you play the game of only fighting back against MS, than you'll just get raped by someone else. IMHO the US needs to fire absolutely everyone involved in any way with their legal system and burn all of the books and start fresh, maybe something like actual law and order might arise from such a thing. /end troll
code have been appropriated from microsoft!
when SCO wins, it will all be clear.
Ballmer and his company are simply robber barons looking for their piece of EVERYTHING
it's extensive IP portfolio is important in all aspects of our daily lives.
it's just a shame we have to flush so much of it down daily
I replace all my customers windows with linux so as to alleviate the fear of the BSA kicking down their doors and demanding licenses and now this. we are still not free from the clutches of the established software houses no matter how hard we try. What do I tell my customers when they hear Ballmer beating up the lips in this fashion now ?
Let us all remember who it is that is complicit in this FUD campaign, Novell 's self-serving deal legitimizes Microsoft's assault on Linux. Regardless of the technical wording of the deal, and whether it can be established that Novell is violating the letter of the GPL 2, they are certainly violating its spirit, Novell must not be supported.
--10scjed IANAL,AFAIK
Steven, when you use a Trojan Horse strategy, you have to remember to wait to attack until the doors are closed, night has fallen, and the city inhabitants are all asleep in their beds.
Overall grade: C+
Great execution of a sneaky plan at the beginning. Strong-arming Novell was a masterstroke. Then you brought the whole plan down because you were too impatient. Reread The Prince before our next assignment.
Read the EFF's Fair Use FAQ
Thanks Mr. Ballmer you just helped me make up my mind. I will be buying Apple's newest unix based laptop to replace my current RedHat based laptop.
I started linux with slackware and later Suse but I stopped trusting Suse when Novell bought it and made it hard for me to download Evolution. I'll be using the newly GPL'd Eudora on my Mac, which always was my favorite mail software too. I had a moment's hesitation an hour ago.. should I get a PC instead... but luckily I had already realized Vista is utter crap and your loathesome announcements have finally pushed me over the edge.
I may use windows for clients who have it but I will vociferously promote linux and Mac OSX and tell all I can how they should reconsider Microsoft, as your company has taken on an undisclosed balance sheet risk, namely from all the lawsuits with which you will be clobbered as a followup to SCO's loss.
It also makes me wonder just how long you will keep your job. As the new Millenium advances, your older shareholders will die, and society's understanding will grow that it is better to create good works and share knowledge than to spend all your profits on evil lawsuits, lies, FUD and general vomit which is all anyone hears coming from your mouth.
Novell will not survive long as your bitch, and I do not think people are going to put up with your utterly cynical and destructive pronouncements for very much longer. Microsoft's shareholders will soon begin to understand that they will be best served by sweeping out the dead wood like you, which got Microsoft to domination through rapacious practices, and turn over a new leaf based on trust.
If Microsoft made good software I would buy it for use on whatever operating system I had, but there is just no reason to buy Microsoft if 1) I hate everything the company stands for and 2) its entire business model is based on either selling outdated bloatware or fooling people into buying upgrades that progressively limit what they are allowed to do with their own purchases.
Time is not on your side, which is why I presume you have undertaken such a desperate and risky course of action. Incidentally I will have to continue to use Windows in some cases when work requires it, however I will run it virtually on Parallels within Mac OSX with an old license (I will not buy Windows in the future either). I believe this is the best way to keep viruses (including your cynically named Windows Updates) at arms' length and use the most advanced technology, which is not of course produced by your company.
Honestly after the past head of Hewlett Packard I would say you are the biggest detriment to any Fortune 100 company in America. Sayonara, as soon as possible please.
I find it annoying that Ballmer and Company are concerned about IP infringement when NT got its start from code/IP/engineers that came from Digital (DEC) back in the early 90's.
Ah, but we don't talk about that. That matter was settled and DEC got to be a prime Microsoft partner ie: Digital/Microsoft Alliance (and we know where that got them).
So please, try being just a little less disingenuous Mr. Ballmer. You're as guilty of IP infringement as the next guy. You just have more money to silence the masses.
Posted as an AC for career reasons.
Annoyed ex-DEC employee.
Lets say Microsoft have a patent for using "a button with the word 'Go' to start a process".
Balmer seems to be saying that if someone has installed a Linux system that included a program that uses "a button with the word 'Go' to start a process", then Microsoft could sue them (the user) for patient infringement.
Ok, IBM, Sun, HP etc. probably have quite a few patents themselves.
So, lets assume that IBM has a patent for using "a button with the word 'Stop' to stop a process".
Does that mean that if someone has installed a Windows system that included a program that uses "a button with the word 'Stop' to stop a process", then IBM could sue them (the user) for patient infringement.
If Microsoft can sue Linux users for infringing [insert patent number here], then surely this implies that [insert name here] can sue Windows users for infringing [insert patent number here].
In which case, doesn't everyone who has a Windows system installed "sort of has an undisclosed balance sheet liability" too, because there are lots of people out there with patents that cover lots of things, many of which we don't know about yet, and some of which may be used in Windows.
They should have known about this for 10 years. The fact that they didn't do anything prevents them from enforcing any patents at this point.
In a way we should be thanking Ballmer. A lot of people run Linux now and the thrill of simply putting it on one's machine is long gone.
Ballmer's comments, and the presumable legal action which will follow them in the future, lets us feel like outlaws, non-conformists, and rebels again. SCO was never really a thrilling nemesis
SCO is...well...SCO is...pathetic.
I never really had that thrill of running something as unlikely as Linux; by the time I got it installed (2001), it was pretty popular, installers had made it simple, and it wasn't a big deal. But now, not only will my 5 years of Linux usage be a functional and utilitarian experience (which is the sum total of what it has been thus far)-- but also one of spite and defiance going forward.
I enjoy spite and defiance. Don't you? I'd rather be dragging down kings and military regimes, but this will do as a small snack in my comfortable suburban kitchen.
A small thrill, but it feels good, nonetheless.
I can't be the only one who felt *good* to be a Linux user when I read this.
The chances of me downgrading to something like Vista were null to begin with, but now, well...
The only thing I have to say about Windows is, well, bitch if I need to, I'll run your OS in a *window*.
Okay, it's official: I have a serious man-crush on Eben Moglen. I seriously suspect he's shielding his cards until he has a serious Killer App of a maneuver to unleash.
Will he immediately ask for an injunction to stop Novell from distributing any GPL-covered code? That'd be awesome.
This might be more fun: will OpenSuSE make a high-profile declaration that they are now distributing checksum-verified copies of Novell's non-patent-infringing distro?
My turnips listen for the soft cry of your love
heh. whatever.
My turnips listen for the soft cry of your love
God damn I wish I didn't have to fucking use windows at work.
"First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win." -- Mohandas Gandhi
Looks like we've moved to the 'fight' stage.
09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0 Whoops, silly middle mouse button...
These days, you can patent anything. Linux probably violates some of Microsoft's patents -- but they're probably stupid patents that will be overturned by a court.
That doesn't mean it's not expensive to litigate.
You might want to try cleaning under there with a Q-Tip or something.
For a company whose main product is named Windows and was released a few years after xwindows.
Every single product they sell was purchased or ripped off, or both.
Balmer may have big brass ones, but they're nothing compared to what's in his head.
Microsoft has never been especially innovative, except in developing underhanded business practices to lift ideas from its developers and competitors and use its primary position as the OS provider to broaden its hegemony. The history speaks for itself, from GUI (a Xerox and Apple innovation) to the browser wars with Netscape, MS has always absorbed maturing technologies as opposed to developing new ones.
This latest divide-and-conquer strategy is bound to sting the FOSS movement, but hopefully it will galvanize ethical companies involved in FOSS to finally gang up on Microsoft.
I hope Vista founders and that we begin to see an increasing diversity of operating systems with strong open standards for cross platform document sharing. For the sake of fair competition, worldwide computer security and continued innovation I hope it so. We now know that monoculture is dangerous. Look at this latest spate of zombie spam running on SP2 boxes. Terrible. Think Vista will be better? Doubt it. Microsoft has not been able to entice customers to its server package, now it is trying to scare them. HP can do a lot more for Linux if they want and so can Dell. They might have to stand up to MS, but they can do a lot. And for that matter so can IBM, Apple and Google. As I said, this is the time to kick the MS habit.
"No fear. No envy. No meanness." Liam Clancy
I can't believe this shit!!! M$ has stolen every great idea, innovation, intellectual property or whatever its entire existence!!! It hasn't come up with a single innovation on its own...it just steals from others and then markets it as its own innovation...come on people, these are convicted monopolists with their business ethics in the toilet!
Could someone please poke that fucker's eyes out for me??
Mod parent insightful - for those of you that don't know, yes politicians and lawyers do do this, in Congress for example. Congressman are allowed to take the floor and talk about wookies just to kill time and bore the other side to death so they give up on passing a bill and go home. It's not quite the same as what the parent posted, but it's another example of lawyers and politically minded officials stalling for time as a lame way to defeat the opposing party versus making an actual arguement...
With references to 'undisclosed balance sheet liabilities' Ballmer seems to be directly threatening business use of Linux.
What if MS did putsue litigation against Linux users for patent infringement, and what if the courts upheld this litigation -- would I as a non-profit, home user of Linux actually have to worry?
Is there a fair use clause regarding patents? Just interested as a legal issue.
From glancing at the articles, this Microsoft/Novell issue seems to be even bigger than what the slashdot crowd and news articles have stated.
IANAL, but in order for a project to sue someone, all authors of that project need to be behind the lawsuit. Since Novell is probably out of the picture, all projects that any Novell employee has been a part of now can be copied by Microsoft without Microsoft ever worrying about getting sued.
It seems that Novell has sold the Linux soul (and the GPL2). Yes, the American system of copyrights is stupid for one company to sell a copyright of software it does not fully own, but the American government does not care.
This scares me a ton, especially since I cannot think of anything that I can do to stop it.
corporate reach-around. Ballmer, if you make claims back them up with facts. I know that's a hard concept to understand. If there is Microsoft IP in GPL code (including the kernel) then point it out.
Ballmer: Bla bla bla. Linux infringes our intellectual property. [Unfortunately, Ballmer always uses weasel words that make it impossble for him to be p**wned like this.]
Guy: Which. Intellectual. Property.
Ballmer: Huuuuuuuuuuh?
Guy: Which intellectual property does Linux infringe upon?
[By now Ballmer is looking ridiculous no matter what he says, which is why he avoids situations like this by 45 miles.]
Couldn't these linux companies sue Microsoft for libel? They could bring them to court and either force them to stop spreading these lies or at least deal with the issue and resolve it.
Check out my lame java blog at www.javachopshop.com
I think this is the first time there's a fud tag but no "notfud".
I wouldn't consider myself a fanboy of any company...sure I have preferences, but when all is said and done whatever in my mind works best is what I will use, regardless of who makes it or distributes it. Now, normally I would be one of the first people to defend microsoft, but in this instance...well...a big ol' loogie that has yet to be formed will have their company logo on it. Insofar as what this article refers to and about what has been publically said, I don't believe Microsoft has ever made a bigger mistake in their entire history
Living With a Nerd
Settling these sorts of things is what declarative judgement suits are for.
Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
The Monkey Boy blirts out: FFS...If you want a job done, do it yourself...
Once and for all. The powers that be in the linux community need to hit back. Spreading this fud can constitute a RICO violation and civil RICO means triple damages. Ballmer is trying to interfere with the legitimate business of other entities with lies, he's creating massive liability for MSFT. If Ballmer can't prove it, Red Hate et. al. can fuck him up.
Reduce, reuse, cycle
"I use Linux so sue me" web site with a list of businesses and individuals who are willing to call MS's bluff.
This is a simple give me your money or I'll hit you tactic. The *only* successful strategy against that is to stand up to them right now. So band together and make sure they're going to see who they'll be up against if they do try to sue. They then lose whether they sue or not.
Deleted
Q: Are there patent infringing portions of code in Linux?
A: Of course there are. As in every goddamn nontrivial software in the USA, where software patents are valid.
Q: So Linux will be forced to remove code from the kernel?
A: I personally don't think Microsoft will be actually that stupid to sue. After all, IBM is the patent king with 20'000 software patents. If they go into a counterattack MS could close shop because no part of Windows will be non-patent infringing. So the three choices are: noone will sue, everyone will sue and the court nukes every major OS on the planet, or that everyone will sue and patent reform will commence in the USA.
Q: But, but Microsoft will just pull out of the EU and show'em!
A: How is this relevant here? Do I have to remind people all the time that it's not going to happen? (Yes, I actually do have to...)
It takes a man to suffer ignorance and smile
Be yourself no matter what they say
The main reason many businesses do business with IBM - and the main reason they recovered in the software space from being seen as a fading mainframe company to regain their leadership position - is that they're seen as the company who is a viable alternative to Microsoft.
If they become a middleman for a Microsoft IP *SCAM* (and yes, that's what it is), noone will respect them anymore.
You just solved my problem. Two days ago, I ordered Suse 10.2beta and Slackware 11.0. I couldn't figure out which I would try first. I had heard that Suse was originally just a German translation of Slackware, so I was going to use the more originial of the two. But, then, I read a review of Suse that called it "the most complete Linux solution available", so then I was going to try Suse.
I understand that Novell has its butt to cover, but, a deal with M$? Really!!! Absurd!!! They may as well have shot themselves in both feet and jumped into the nearest shark-infested water as far as I'm concerned.
Slackware is going on my PC, and Suse is going in the trash. Or perhaps I should keep it around for later comparison with newly M$ tainted versions.
It would be interesting to see how Suse slowly rots away under the watchfull eye of Billy G. and his minions.
"In a world that exists without walls and fences, who needs Windows and Gates?"
I'm switching my company off SuSE, starting today.
I was a big fan of Novell. When they first released the announcement of their (MSNovell) deal, I was willing to give them the benefit of the doubt. I was willing to ignore the the various cries from the open source community, because I was willing to trust Novell, and willing to trust SuSE.
No more.
Screw you. I will not support any company that makes a deal with MS like this, and tries to lock down Linux like this. I will not pay an innovation tax. I do not want my dollars spent on boxed copies of SuSE going to a deal with MS. I do not want a support contract from an MS-related company.
We don't run Windows in this office. Period. Now, we're not going to run Windows, and we're not going to use Novell products.
WhiteWolf666 an exBush supporter. All you new-school,compassionate,save the children Republicans can rot in hell
Linux distributions probably do violate a few obscure patents that Microsoft holds. Mr. Ballmer--please let us know what they are so that we can work around them or challenge them in court.
The Novell deal, however, is not evidence of this, since it involved a net transfer of money from Microsoft to Novell. Furthermore, Novell publicly stated that they do not admit violating any Microsoft patents.
The only thing Linux infringes on is Microsoft's profit - and probably Microsoft fears that this infringement will only get worse and worse with time. Microsoft tried curtailing Linux using SCO, but we'll see what happens from now on - it may only get worse and worse.
In other news, Mark Cuban is considering buying Microsoft on the off chance it may give him an excuse to sue Tux the Penguin.
"I told you Tux was going down" said Cuban.
Cuban is also considering killing his neighbor, a Ford Pinto driver, to prove how dangerous the Pinto is, and plans to detonate his mother's Macintosh to prove that she should have bought a PC.
Well, of course, it is infringing...
M$ sells an operating system. Linux is an operating system. Therefore, linux copied windows! Quite obvious, really.
There should only be one operating system, provided by M$ of course. Hence, complete control of the world's computers.
Well, at least it is out in the open now. M$ will stop at nothing to crush any alternative system. Evidentally, Balmer (and his handlers) aren't too bright to let him blunder on like this.
Oh please.
How could anyone prove that the bible contains falsehoods? We don't have pictures, or video evidence. No Christian will accept that acts within the bible are impossible because they have a different word for impossible acts. They call them miracles.
So why was God so interested in the world back then when Angels came down and kicked ass, turned cities to salt, dropped plagues - and now God doesn't seem to give a shit about what's going on? Is God dead? Doesn't care anymore? Trying to cut back on the old long distance plan? Or perhaps some of that stuff in the bible was overstated or didn't happen? We'll never know because that's what faith is for. Don't question - believe. Or the God of mercy and love will send your sorry ass to roast in hell....
In a world where more people are dying in wars than used to exist in 'biblical times', you'd figure God would be down here kicking Hitler's ass or dropping holy H-bombs on irreligious armies.
Fact: A lot of the religion of Christianity was stolen from earlier religions - based on the very religions they called pagan. Do some research. If your book is valid, might not the other history books be valid too? If God created the world - he must have been some pissed that it took civilized humans thousands of years to even start his religion....pretty relaxed about that shit, hey?
I am sure that this will be modded down but it makes me angry when people toss out 'proofs' based on faith. 'Prove God doesn't exist.' - do you understand logic? Prove that God does exist.
Now back to your regularly scheduled argument about MS/LINUX.
This sig contains a manual self-destruct. Kindly please put your foot through your monitor in 8 seconds.
Obligatory Miguel de Icaza quote: "But Microsoft would never do anything mean to us!"
Don't blame me, I didn't vote for either of them!
The truly ironic bit is that Microsoft is not going to sue anyone over patents. Microsoft execs know that if they did this the various organizations that have a stake in the success of Linux (which is essentially everyone but Microsoft) would pay for a well-funded defense.
The reason is simpler: there is nothing to defend against. Open source users are not willfully infringing patents (they can't, according to the licenses). For non-willful infringement, the worst that is going to happen is that the application in question gets changed slightly or removed before the trial even starts. It would be a tough argument to get the court to go on with a trial after that given the circumstances.
The notion that open source users are at big risk of patent lawsuits from companies like Microsoft is nothing more than FUD.
to spite MS and reinstall my original OS - Slackware? I only installed openSuse because all I had every used was Slackware and I wanted to try some other distributions (after I couldn't get XGL/Compiz to work on Slackware).
With the Novell deal, Microsoft pretends to 'embrace' Novell SUSE Linux and casts a FUD shadow over non-SUSE Linux but that's not the whole thing. Next will come the Microsoft products that extend SUSE Linux to 'interoperate' with Windows and, guess what, they might actually become popular and useful for both Windows and Novell SUSE Linux users. Finally comes 'extinguish' where the new products become obstacles to using other OSS software and non-SUSE linux.
The word "infringe" does not appear in TFA.
You can mince words, but the claim is the same
Of course, he's full of shit. He suggests SAMBA and the like are infringing because they are able to interoperate and somehow interoperability is tantamount to infringement. That's patent poppy cock, he might as well sue people for using ASCI. The moral argument he's trying to make is that some return is deserved from the big dollars he's wasting on an obsolete software development and promotion model. Sorry Stevie boy, that's not the was a free economy works. M$ is free to waste seven billion dollars digging a hole to China but they have no right to expect me to make that investment pay off when others build airplanes.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
His only hope is that no IBM patent lawyer was around. Microsoft started patenting shit like crazy not so long ago, 5-6 years maybe. The trigger was a huge, detailed infringement notice from IBM. Microsoft's portfolio was relatively small at the time, so they had to scramble and find some patents that IBM infringes on to bring down the price of licensing the patents from IBM. That's how big companies operate these days. They look at each other's portfolios and decide who pays who and how much. The bigger your portfolio - the more likely you are to not pay anything and maybe even get the money. Quality of the patents is secondary, no one has the time to study a few thousand patents each year.
For as long as Linux is at the core of what IBM does, Linux can sleep tight at night. Any patent claims will just not fly since IBM can steamroll anyone with their huge patent portfolio.
HOW are you going to claim that an open-source has stolen from a closed sorce app. Isn't it more likely that there is open source code being used illegally (under the GPL) in THEIR product? Especially because they have a habit of me-too programming or just buying the other vendor outright instead of innovation.
And is M$ going to be able to PROVE their property was stolen; they would have to show us "theirs" to do it?
If you've never been modded as "flamebait" or "troll," you've never tried to argue a minority viewpoint here!
And then it became so much easier.
Balmer et al wouldn't understand it anyway.
Mr. Balmer and your associates. I believe I speak for all of us when I say.
"Fuck off. You can't compete, you lost. Go throw chairs"
Happiness does not come from having much, but from being attached to little.
Pax Romana
Pax Mongolica
[...]
Pax Britannica
Pax Americana
Pax Redmonda
EasyUbuntu did my laptop and it upgraded from 6.06LTS to 6.10 without a hitch.
"Made up/misattributed quote that makes me look smart. I am on
Novell isn't paying Microsoft, Microsoft is making a net payment to Novell. They have simply structured it so that they can pretend that the deal involves Novell paying something to Microsoft, presumably so that they have some way of claiming that some open source entity is paying them something for their patents. This sort of claim may fool a few people, but I doubt it's going to hold much water in court.
But if Microsoft wants to make more of those contracts, if they send me $240m, I'll also gladly sign a contract that additionally licenses all their patents to me. Mr. Ballmer, are you listening?
Dear Steve Balmer:
Put up or shut up moron. If Linux uses your "Intellectual Property," what ever that is (trade secret, copyright, patent, what?), tell us so that the situation may be recified.
Short of that you are a bogus rumor monger trying to spread FUD who who should be investigated by the SEC, IRS, and and any other government agency that deals with idiots like you.
I am so sick of the "guilt by accusation" bull shit.
You know what.... You guys can speculate all you want... I am sure that once Microsoft does what it wants to do we will find that were in the exact same place. If our code infringes on Microsoft's code (which we haven't saw yet) then someone will just re-write it... Linux will live regardless of Microsoft... Personally, I wouldn't worry about it... If someone took me to court saying I stole there "code"... I would say "Fine" and go home and re-write it.... done.
Give them a break. They can't possibly be expected to respond to every crackpot who has some theory about infringement or 'intellectual property'.
Bad analogy. Gozer lost and the Marshmellow Man got roasted.
Gozer was the bad guy and yes, he lost.
The Stay-Puft Marshmallow Man was brought forth by Gozer but created/conceived by one of the good guys. The Stay-Puft Marshmallow Man was a bad guy and also lost.
That was exactly my point.
LoB
"Anyone who stands out in the middle of a road looks like roadkill to me." --Linus
So why was God so interested in the world back then when Angels came down and kicked ass, turned cities to salt, dropped plagues - and now God doesn't seem to give a shit about what's going on? Is God dead? Doesn't care anymore? Trying to cut back on the old long distance plan? Or perhaps some of that stuff in the bible was overstated or didn't happen? We'll never know because that's what faith is for.
I'll tell you where a lot of it comes from. Much of it is true. For instance, read the Book of Ezekiel, about "Ezekiel's Wheel". It tells of Ezekiel seeing Jehovah come down from the heavens. Realize that at that time, they had no technology at all, and wouldn't understand advanced technology, and you'll see that he's really describing a space ship of some type.
Hindu mythology has similar passages. One of their books describes a massive war where a "celestial weapon" was used, causing people's hair to fall out and other symptoms that sound very much to knowledgable people today like radiation sickness. Basically, it very accurately describes an atomic weapon.
Many, if not most, of the "gods" of ancient myth, could very well be real. But they weren't gods, they were aliens visiting earth for some reason. For some other reason, they're no longer here getting involved in our business.
I smell lawsuits... lots of them... coming... closer..closer..
MS has their mono.
Let us stick with poly.
I originally went to SUSE from Windows because it was reported to be a good bridge. It was decent, but since Novell's deal I've switched to Kubuntu (KDE Ubuntu), and I can tell you that I find it easier, faster, and more pleasurable to use than SUSE. SUSE always had a corporate-stupidity feel lurking there (I was not too surprised by the merger with MS - disgusted, but not surprised). I find Ubuntu a very well automated OS, especially for software installation and upgrade. Much more trouble-free than SUSE. Hardware installation/configuration can require a little more attention in Ubuntu, but it's worth the little bit of research sometimes required. A lot of my chronic problems vanished when I went to Kubuntu (network issues in particular). I'm currently taking SUSE off all the machines in my care. So long, and thanks for all the fish.
I'd like to know what /.'ers think the right thing to do is.
1. Start a drive to invalidate patents.
2. Identify MS patents in OSS and design around them.
3. Get a judge to ??? in regards to the MS monopoly status?
4. Draw Oracle/Dead Cat/IBM into the fray?
5. Go offshore? e.g. host projects in patent hostile countries?
MS is still sitting in the driver's seat, ready to legally carpet bomb every distro into oblivion. DSL, Slackware, Debian, Mandriva, Freespire, Mepis, are just a few that I seriously doubt have the legal resources to go even one round in court.
It's important that there are so many distros. This is how linux is winning right now. Linux is everywhere and nowhere at the same time.
A couple of cease and desist letters from MS and they will control Linux too.
What's YOUR idea to address the threat?
http://www.maxineudall.com/2010/02/should-economists-be-sued-for-malpractice.html
...As a linux user, how am I benefitting from Microsofts 'innovation'? Linux is just a kernel...Show me what Microsoft has innovated in terms of kernels please?
maybe this is preempting obfuscation. Perhaps vista contains Linux code. This trickery would have both camps so caught up in litigation that no one would have the time or resources to notice that.
we already know that Microsoft's TCP/IP implementation originally came from Unix.
They're using their grammar skills there.
Kubuntu.
Regular Ubuntu includes the GNOME desktop, which includes Mono, which is almost certainly the Microsoft IP Ballmer is referring to.
Alternatively, you can go with regular Ubuntu and then strip out Mono. For now, GNOME still runs without it.
GCHQ Quantum Insert installed. If only our tongues were made of glass, how much more careful we would be when we speak
"First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win."
Microsoft: Now, that you've signed, I think you should know that we will be working hard to bring RedHat's customers to Suse.
Novell: That sounds great! How are you going to do it?
Microsoft: By endorsing Suse as Microsoft's ordained distribution. Our research shows that people are just looking for a way to be assimilated into the big tent. Suse is can be the tent; the cure for individualism.
Novell: Are you sure? This movement is populated by hairy individualists.
Microsoft: We don't care about the FSF. Our research shows that most everyone else will greet you as liberators, freeing them from the chaos of fragmentation.
Novell: What if Slackware does not wish to be assimilated?
Microsoft: Resistance is futile. Suse will be assimilated. Linux will be assimilated.
Novell: Alright, but I need to make sure your check clears by Friday.
The "put up or shut up" legal tactic does work very well.
I would like to recommend a new USA-MS marketing slogan:
"Microsoft, for US, screws-up the best and messes up the rest."
---- A USA "Chamber of CorporatistCommunism League" Member ----
Unaccountable leaders are masters, and unrepresented people are slaves. How do US and EU fare?
Congratulations Linux!
this recent action by microsoft:
1. is validation that you have arrived and are an excellent (in many ways, superior) alternative to msft products!
2. this is fud, pure and simple. it is aimed at manipulating businesses. if it hits some home users, that is merely icing.
3. for those who want linux distro consolidation - this is a small victory. suse is now persona non grata. i was looking forward to checking into ubuntu and suse - but only ubuntu is on the on the list now. i like mepis, too, but i think my dad may find ubuntu a bit more to his taste. suse is toast. visit http://www.novell.com/linux/, find the contact phone number and complain. get their email address here: http://www.novell.com/company/contact.html. let them know how this was a bad decision and their open hostility toward the open source community is their linux death certificate.
4. the cat is already out of the bag: just look at mp3 downloads in the face of 10,000 lawsuits naming individuals... those who like linux will still use it.
5. your shareholders want you to enforce your patents IF you have any - so what are they? if you don't, your shareholders want lots of fud.
well, one group of people is happy about suse's deal with msft... benedict arnold's ancestors.
ps - stevie, i'm a bit worried about your lack of imagination. it is as though you went and saw the new star wars movies and decided SCO would be the trade federation and you'd be, well, the emperor (now that that old jedi bill is gone, anyway).
anyway, good luck with the fudd - but it cost you. although i like all those good discounts on windows boxes that come along this time of year - i will not purchase a computer with windows pre-installed.
steve: "i think linux infringes on msft's undisclosed ip"
steve: "of course i'm ethical."
me: "bzzzzzzt!"
I really didn't, I thought that Novell would do better than sell out the last of their dedicated fans. I love administrating our Novell network. I loved SUSE Linux before Novell bought them, even more afterwards! And now Steve Ballmer has ME ready to throw some chairs over his statements.
I don't feel we as a community have taken ANYTHING away from those pretentious bastards, things are quite the opposite. I would be forever hurt to watch something as stupid and ineffective as government crush the open source movement over something as silly and wrong as the claims MS is making.
I went to eat some animal crackers and the box said, "Do not eat if seal is broken." I opened the box and sure enough..
Does anyone remember the patents MS bought from SGI about three years ago? There is speculation that patents covering OpenGL were bought. They probably found out about them in the Fahrenheit days.
This is the exact type of FUD that Microsoft is going after. No need to file any lawsuits. The aversion of risk attitude in public corporations will force spineless CIOs simply to stop considering Linux to be a solution.
It would be in the best interest of the Open Source community to have a real court case to resolve this question once and for all.
For example, if a patent
license would not permit royalty-free redistribution of the Program by
all those who receive copies directly or indirectly through you, then
the only way you could satisfy both it and this License would be to
refrain entirely from distribution of the Program.
This is further supported by AT&T's argument that BSD was contaminated through exposure to AT&T's intellectual property. That lawsuit was settled and not won, if I recall correctly. Novell's employees are now subject to exposure to information Microsoft provably regards as intellectual property - otherwise there'd be no point in a sustained relationship. If code can be contaminated because of exposure to someone else's code, even if that code is never actually used in the final product, then anything Novell releases may be contaminated.
(If the "contamination" argument sounds absurd, then logically I'd have to agree. However, this is the main reason that Open Source developers are careful to "clean room" such stuff, where the person who sees the original code or reverse-engineers the original specs does NOT write the code but ONLY documents the inputs, outputs and relationships. The code-writer is then much safer from claims of contamination, as they are merely writing code to an abstract description of what the code does, they are not writing it based on anything they themselves have seen in other code elsewhere.)
Is there infringing software? Well, that depends on whether anyone was careless. If Mono, SMB, CIFS, Samba, Samba-NG, NTFS, VFAT or any other potentially patentable concepts were developed without rigorous clean-rooming, then there is a risk of contamination. A risk does not mean contamination actually occurred, and contamination is not a proven legal notion as far as I know, as the AT&T fiasco is not much of a legal precedent to work from.
That's for copyright, though, this is patent law. There, if there's an infringement, it need only be within the confines of the patent, it need not be the result of copying or contamination. A completely independent development would violate a patent, as a patent is on a process, not an instance. I believe this is true even if the independent development was parallel to - or even preceded - the patented work. Prior art is not automatically safe - many of the victims of Thomas Eddison were prior inventors and I believe case law (any prior ruling, even if insane, stupid or blatantly absurd) dictates what a judge can do.
This is actually one very major weakness of ANY Open Source license - because prior art isn't safe, corrupt corporations can take an Open Source product, patent the ideas within it and sue the original author. In theory, this shouldn't be possible. In practice, there are good reasons for believing it is not only possible but a very reasonable possibility.
(My counter to that is that exploitable bugs in the law should be fixed and that workarounds are little more than exploits of bugs or weaknesses within the exploits and are therefore at best a temporary reprieve. I'd quite like to see changes that ensured that if prior art was sued for patent infringement that the patent and rights were transferred to the defendant on the grounds that they're more likely the real inventor. I'd also like to see software patents filed in a radiation-proof concrete-lined, lead-lined corrosion-resistant, nuke-proof steel drum before being dropped into a bore-hole that reached the inner limits of the Earth's crust - that being a far safer place for them than in the hands of lawyers. Well, unless the software patent lawyers were also filed in said drum, in which case it wouldn't matter what their hands held.)
It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
Sometimes I wonder whether the head knows what the body's doing at all with MS. Ballmer's attitude consistantly seems to contradict MS' as a whole recently.
It reminds me very much of Steve Ballmer as presented in this hypothetical memo.
Do you see what I did there?
Hello Slashdotters,
If you are a Linux user and you believe some sort of legal action should be taken regarding these threats from Microsoft, please contact me at the following address: linux_vs_ms@users.sourceforge.net
The legal action might include forcing Microsoft to substantiate their claims of patent infringement, and preventing them from making further threats against Linux, its users and developers.
The address again is linux_vs_ms@users.sourceforge.net
Thank you,
A Sympathetic Paralegal
Damn, & I just got my SuSE 10.0 working all nice on my box...does this mean the OSS community are gonna consider me a traitor if I carry on using it? I'll see what happens, stick with Novell/SuSE for a bit....then maybe move to another distro. Steve BALLmer can kiss my chode. Out.
http://nathanlindsell.blogspot.com/
Sorry for the all caps title, but I seriously believe that Linux developers need to call their bluff. Combined with all the corporations that benefit from Linux. I think they should all pitch in and buy a full page ad in the New York Times, LA Times, Atlana Journal Constitution, Wall Street Journal, Washington Post, and every other major newspaper in the country with the text being:
"The following companies, corporations, and persons call upon you, Microsoft, to formally state exactly and explicitly which patents or other IP currently owned by Microsoft or any of their subsidiaries are being infringed upon by the Linux Operating System or any Linux Operating System component, computer application, program or other Open Source Software. If you cannot fulfill this simple request, all of the undersigned formally request you cease all veiled threats of lawsuits against users, purchasers, companies, and/or coporations currently utilizing the Linux Operating System and attendant software."
Red Hat should lead the charge with Samba tagging along immediately. Then IBM would get pulled into the fray along with Sun, Oracle, and every computer manufacturer that sells Linux servers/workstations (pretty much every damn one of them). Then the other major Linux companies and users can get on the bandwagon which would include some heavyweights as well: Google, Amazon, pretty much _every_ ISP in the United States (and the world), large-scale datacenters, universities, and many, many more. With that many entities set against Microsoft threatening Linux and OSS and stating it quite publicly, then Microsoft has to either put up or shut up. Not to mention that the software patent war that could happen should prove, without a doubt, how horrendously stupid software patents really are. A pipe dream? Maybe. But something quite akin to a revolution is brewing and I'm interested to see how it plays out since I also feel one brewing against the MPAA/RIAA as well.
Dream as if you'll live forever.
Live as if you'll die tomorrow.
~Anonymous~
That parenthetical note is key here. Linux didn't have an SMB server before Microsoft did; no, Samba isn't part of the Linux kernel, but it is part of a lot of Linux distributions (as well as being used on other UN*X OSes), and Microsoft do have a licensing process for SMB and various protocols that run atop it [microsoft.com], so that might be what Ballmer was referring to.
Ah but I thought that was one of the reasons behind the EU's fine against Microsoft. MS was supposed to open up at least some of the APIs used in Windows so third parties could write applications and utilities for Windows, especially for interoperability with other OSs like Linux. IF MS doesn't allow Samba and interoperability then they aren't opening their APIs.
FalconShould there be a Law?
I don't think that's the question either. None of that matters in todays climate of software patents. I wouldn't be at all surprised given the rubber stamp approval of patents these days if Microsoft had several patents that covered tcp/ip networking or any of other things listed. I mean, for FSM's sake, NTP has 7 patents for sending email to little computers. Microsoft applies for a ridicules number of patents regularly covering some of the most idiotic and trivial things. It could turn very bloody. It's the nuclear option and Microsoft is as psychotic as Kim Jong-il with nukes. It's guaranteed if they feel threatened the nukes will fly. They've already tried the proxy war thing with SCO and failed.
Who is John Galt?
MS is already shaking down the school kids.
At the moment all the big guns have there aim at each other. Their ammo is their patents. But this is a shootout to the death. The moment one shot is fired all shots will be fired and there won't be any survivors. The lawyers are rubbing their hands together and measuring up the coffins.
Who is going to be the first to pull the trigger ?
The other Microsoft related headline is that Europe is trying to force Microsoft to share information about Windows protocols with open-source projects like Samba, to allow and improve interoperability with other operating systems. Microsoft's initial response was to only offer that information to other businesses at a high price. Europe persisted, and Microsoft has adopted this new strategy; still insisting they be paid for compliance with government regulation.
I made the same mistake, earlier in this thread I wrote about the EU's fines against MS and how the EU wanted MS to open up Windows APIs and such for interoperatibility with software and other OS's. However someone else corrected me on it. According to the EU's (pdf) decision MS was required only to open up with "reasonable and non-discriminatory terms".
FalconShould there be a Law?
So microsoft makes a deal with a Linux Distributor to hold them harmess if they use MS IP and also hold MS hamless if MS uses SuSE IP. Then, once that deal is inked - starts talking about how possibly there is MS IP in Linux.
Makes you wonder if it isn't the aother way around as well and they already are infringing on Linux IP...
If that is the case I don't think a contact with one distributor would imdemnify MS from any infringing GPL or other non SuSE code in thier offerings.
"Enjoy what you're doing! If it becomes drudgery, you're doing it wrong!" - Jim Butterfield
A company that has to sue (or threaten to sue) to retain its position is often on the way down.
This brings to mind Lotus suing Borland for Quattro's 123-keystroke emulation ability. I thought it was completely clear at the time that Lotus was suing Borland because it was their only hope -- they could no longer compete on the basis of their software. Quattro Pro had blown past 123 as a quality spreadsheet. (And while the two companies were distractedly duking it out, Microsoft Excel then blew past them both.)
Whatever threats Microsoft makes, the bottom line is that if they had compelling products and dazzling new features, Ballmer would pitching the products, he wouldn't be talking in vague terms about protecting their IP. By using lawsuits, Microsoft can cause a lot of pain for everyone, and I'm sure their revenue stream will go on for years. But this is evidence that Microsoft thinks it is losing its market position.
I wonder about the timing of this stuff...
Maybe Microsoft don't like the idea of another gorilla throwing a hat in the operating system ring... Whispers of a possible acquisition move by Oracle for Redhat increase the threat of Linux somewhat - especially in the enterprise domain. Could this FUD be designed to make Oracle Linux a stillborn?
I thought I'd do a quick Google search and see if good ol' Microsoft has ever "appropriated" any code themselves. In just a few minutes, I found eight instances where Microsoft lost court battles over the code they stole. Here you go:
.NET and related security technologies
As a response to Digital Research's DR-DOS 6.0, which bundled SuperStor disk compression, Microsoft opened negotiations with Stac Electronics, vendor of the most popular DOS disk compression tool, Stacker. Stac was unwilling to meet Microsoft's terms for licensing Stacker and withdrew from the negotiations. In the due diligence process, Stac engineers had shown Microsoft some Stacker source code. However, Microsoft chose to license Vertisoft's DoubleDisk instead of Stacker.[2]
Soon, MS-DOS 6.0 was released, including the Microsoft DoubleSpace disk compression utility program. Stac successfully sued Microsoft for patent infringement regarding the compression algorithm used in DoubleSpace. This resulted in the release of MS-DOS 6.21, which had disk-compression removed. Shortly afterwards came version 6.22, with a new version of the disk compression system, DriveSpace, rewritten to avoid the infringing code.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MS-DOS
A new patent battle is brewing -- this time over Microsoft's (Quote) claim over Caller ID for E-Mail.
F. Scott Deaver, owner of Failsafe Designs, says Microsoft is guilty of the "outright theft" of his product name and intellectual property (IP), and will seek legal and financial redress from the Redmond, Wash., software giant and anyone else that uses his technology that verifies e-mail is coming from the domain it claims.
http://www.internetnews.com/security/article.php/3 393891
Alacritech® Inc., the innovator of Dynamic TCP Offload(TM) data acceleration solutions that enable the highest performance and efficiency in networked systems, today announced a U.S. District Court granted Alacritech's motion for preliminary injunction to prevent Microsoft Corporation (Nasdaq: MSFT) from making, using, offering for sale, selling, importing or inducing others to use Microsoft's "Chimney" TCP offload architecture slated to be available in both the "Longhorn" version of the Windows® operating system and in the Scalable Networking Pack for Windows Server(TM) 2003.
Alacritech sued Microsoft in Federal District Court on August 11, 2004, alleging that Microsoft's existing and future operating systems containing the "Chimney" TCP offload architecture uses Alacritech's proprietary SLIC Technology® architecture. The suit is based on two of Alacritech's fundamental patents relating to scalable networking, U.S. Patent No. 6,427,171 and U.S. Patent No. 6,987,868, both entitled "Protocol Processing Stack for use with Intelligent Network Interface Device."
http://www.alacritech.com/html/041305Alacritech_Gr anted_PI.shtml
In April 2001, Intertrust initiated a lawsuit against Microsoft. The lawsuit ultimately accused Microsoft of infringing 11 of Intertrust's patents and almost 130 of the company's patent claims.
The lawsuit centered on accused products based on the following technologies:
DRM and product activation technologies
Trusted and reliable operating system technologies
In bringing the patent infringement lawsuit, Intertrust believed that Microsoft's forward-going technology infrastructure significantly relied on Intertrust's inventions for DRM and trusted computing.
http://www.intertrust.com/main/ip/settlement.html
(Redwood Shores, CA, December 15, 2005) - Visto Corporation has filed a legal action against Microsoft (NASDAQ: MSFT) for misappropriating Visto's intellectual property. The complaint ass
ConsultingFair.com
Please, explain to me how the subject at hand, the Microsoft-Novell deal, has any relevance to the perceived binary-only kernel driver issue.
I'm afraid it hasn't.
I'm afraid neither Microsoft nor Novell are in a position to either supply hardware drivers, let alone Open Source ones, nor to freeze the internal Linux API.
I'm afraid your mind went off like this:
A) I see problem (proprietary) driver for (Open Source Linux): (coexistance) problem
B) I see cooperation beween (proprietary) company and (Open Source Linux) company to improve (coexistance)
Therefore: A might be solved by B
Prove me wrong.
SUSE does just work...
We have a circa 2001 server at work.
Its not so bad, fairly reliable and takes a shitload of SCA hard drives.
The only (current) distribution that will work reliably on it is SUSE Enterprise Server.
Eg Debian Sarge and Etch both crap out during the install.
I would *love* to run Debian on this box but I can't.
In the free world the media isn't government run; the government is media run.
Maybe somewhere buried in the linux kernel is the code to generate the Blue Screen Of Death, and Microsoft finally found it. Why would it take so long to discover you ask? Simple, because the code's never been invoked on linux :-P.
l d=com)
Maybe they pulled people off of web development to search the linux kernel for their code, because I noticed the other day that Microsoft's WHOIS record is really messed up (http://www.whois.net/whois_new.cgi?d=microsoft&t
I submitted this early yesterday and it was Rejected.. How about some consistency BOb ;-)
On a further note Microsoft Has revealed what was behind door #3 and it was a smelly goat.
quote:
"So we built a technology bridge, and we built an IP bridge and a commercial framework that supports that. Novell said to us, 'Hey, look, if you're serious about this stuff, you better help us promote Suse Linux.' To which we said, 'You know we're trying to sell Windows, that's what we do for a living! Windows, Windows, Windows, baby! We don't do Linux that way here.'
"What we agreed, which is true, is we'll continue to try to grow Windows share at the expense of Linux. That's kind of our job. But to the degree that people are going to deploy Linux, we want Suse Linux to have the highest percent share of that, because only a customer who has Suse Linux actually has paid properly for the use of intellectual property from Microsoft. And we took a quota, you could say, to help them sell so much Suse Linux.That's part of the deal. We are willing to do the same deal with Red Hat and other Linux distributors, it's not an exclusive thing. But after a few years of working on this problem, Novell actually saw the business opportunity, because there's so many customers who say, 'Hey look, we don't want problems. We don't want any intellectual property problem or anything else. There's just a variety of workloads where we, today, feel like we want to run Linux. Please help us Microsoft and please work with the distributors to solve this problem, don't come try to license this individually.' So customer push drove us to where we got."
So basically they think Linux users want their help? Since when? I've never heard of a Linux guy/girl saying "zomg please help me Microsoft! I love you!" Usually it's the complete opposite. That's called 'delusions of grandeur,' Mr. Ballmer.
And besides, last time I checked, Microsoft has never once innovated anything. MSDOS was bought by Gates from the guy who wrote it (QDOS, then). Windows borrowed its GUI from MacOS, which borrowed its GUI from Xerox. The DirectX idea came from OpenGL. Et cetera, et cetera. And that's why they won't say which Microsoft "innovations" Linux is infringing upon.
I think they're trying this because their little SCO scam is losing in court, so they're moving to Plan B.
(A)bort, (R)etry, (I)gnore?_
As I said in one of my postings regarding the Novell/Microsoft deal, Microsoft is simply trying to narrow the field for law suits. They had hoped to get as many companies under their control as possible and then sue as the others. CLEARLY, this is what is being demonstrated by these deals and the Ballmer-speak.
Microsoft couldn't get SCO to be successful by assisting it in suing the Linux community. Now they are using FUD by first forming deals that sheds doubt and shadow on Linux as a development platform. They are saying do it our way and you are safe (thus gaining control over linux and they will use that as a way to get the Antitrust regulators off their backs). This demonstrates they are claiming all kinds of woe caused by Linux to their IP, and then they'll begin suing. I'm sure they felt they could get more companies to join their partnership (which does nothing more than put Microsoft in charge of Linux). By using the FUD they are causing larger businesses to stray from using Linux on their servers and finally pushing people off Linux to Vista.
One thing people could always rely on--If you didn't want the Vista DRM and you didn't think Vista had any compelling reason for the upgrade, and you felt that cost of Vista was where it is due to Microsoft's monopoly--was that you had linux to fall back on.
I've tried Linux again after about 6 months away. Prior to that I had used it for about 2 years. I had it running on most of my machines in my office. The problem was that it became a lot of work to maintain it. Programs were often messy or under developed and getting them updated with apt-get was sometimes easy, it created some problems not worth dealing with. Since my business is something other than supporting or developing Linux I couldn't afford to put up with the time Linux was taking just to get some simple things going. So, I switched back to windows. Most of the time Windows was incredibly easier to install programs and drivers were readily available and if you had solid hardware you never got the BSOD. Granted though, I still used Open Source software and relied on every possible package that would compete with Microsoft for my day to day business.
So, after trying linux on two different boxes (after 6 months away and using Windows) I have to say the problems are still there even with distros such as Ubuntu and Kubuntu. Drivers are sorely lacking, accelerated 3d are missing on the default install (and not easy to install even using the nVidia drivers), packages crashed (amarok, for example--even though the sound and other drivers were sufficient enough to work with it), apps were still very primitive and unpolished, and a review of the desktop pictures at kde-look.org all showed the same old programs being run by everybody.
Nonetheless, I still love Linux. It just isn't there yet. Microsoft has whatever it needs to crush linux when it comes to IP rights (if in fact the IP is being used illegally)--but Microsoft has a reputation of violating other companies IP rights over it's long history as a company. At this time they must see some change we don't see because I can't figure out why they would be implicitly threatening to sue the Linux community at this time, other than they may be afraid that when people see the costs involved in upgrading to Vista -- which are excessive and uncalled for -- will switch to Linux.
You can lead a man with reason but you can't make him think.
"If you want a job done right, do it yourself, eh Balmer? SCO just wasn't up to the task."
The SCO lawsuits were just the beta version. This interview is like the press release announcing when the retail product will ship.
dragonhawk@iname.microsoft.com
I do not like Microsoft. Remove them from my email address.
There's an old saying: "When elephants fight, it is the grass that gets trampled."
In this case, it's a good bet most -- if not all -- of the elephants will also be suffering mortal tusk wounds.
Then the vultures (lawyers) swoop in and feed on the remains.
This is so depressing.
dragonhawk@iname.microsoft.com
I do not like Microsoft. Remove them from my email address.
Microsoft has a problem with _everyone_. Look at their partner-history. Nobody stays partnering to Microsoft, and everyone become their whore. Except Linux, with Novell as the sole exeption in the Linux-crowd...
Linux has caught the attention of the big corporations and to them competition is something you destroy or co-opt. Let's face it, Linux in any distro is not the same as going to Best Buy and getting a preloaded Wintel machine for your parents. No matter what the argument is for Linux and against MS, there are still no preloaded Linux desktop machines at brand name stores. But that doesn't mean that Linux cannot do this soon, very soon.
So MS is going after the competition in two ways - create FUD to prevent growth and acceptance, and now to rot within. But will this happen? And how does this affect RedHat? If MS is going through Novell to rot IP, RH believes it will either have more support thrown their way by default (because it is not an MS shop) but also they truly believe someone else will buy them before MS does (AKA IBM).
So if everyone spends time on jockeying for position and how to place their product then how much innovation and work will continue? Is this what MS is hoping will happen, too?
1) I meant "come up" by "finish" and
2) M$ didn't invent windows because windows (1973) came before M$ (1975).
Please, for the good of Humanity, vote Obama.
If Linux was produced by a commercial company as a proprietary product and Ballmer made such a statement about it-- would that not constitute some legal problem for them if Microsoft didn't then act on it? The longer they wait the less legal standing they might have because they "knew" about it yet did nothing.
Also, can you simply accuse someone of committing a crime in order to cast aspersions, yet do nothing other than that about it? It's tantamount to liable I would think-- but if the only one who could have *proof* of the claim is the one making the claim, yet no proof is offered, how could one defend against such potentially frivolous liable claims?
Somehow I think they're treading on thin ice here if they don't actually plan to sue-- and if they do they'd better shut up and get with it. Certainly if they don't act but just continue to make such claims I would think there would be anti-trust implications. It's like making the claim that "Procter and Gamble makes unsafe products," without being any more specific of what product is being referred to or why they are unsafe. While the statement may even be true if interpreted in a certain way (eating Procter and Gamble's soap could be unsafe, even if they specifically warn you not to eat it), I think P&G would set the lawyers on them if their biggest competitor started making such a claim all over the airwaves...
I think, just because Linux isn't a "corporation" like P&G is, doesn't mean that there aren't people who "own" it and could sue for damages. Sure, it's GPL, but that doesn't mean noone owns it, or everyone does, that's just the licensing. And a class-action suit by those who make money even indirectly from Linux might have something to say about it as well...
On the other hand, they may only be looking for short-term negative effects, now that the SCO suit is fizzling and Vista is at a critical stage, any kind of cloud of FUD they can produce and send towards Linux would be an advantage-- except that I would think they're at some risk here if they don't plan to start the legal proceedings rolling (and they're at some risk even if they do)...
To Ballmer-- SHUT UP AND COMPETE. I guess you don't have the confidence that Vista is a better OS than Linux and can readily compete on its merits, and therefore found the need to resort to such underhanded claims Consequently, it looks to me that you've already lost the battle and I can't see why anyone would want Vista given such an utter lack of confidence you are showing in it.
We don't want our smoking gun to be an undisclosed balance sheet liability.
I don't get it. Why don't those guys just shut up and fix their dumb software. Why do we the consumer have to deal with their inferior products because they have bad software engineering practices and bad quality control. Thats my opinion of Microsoft. I'm going to continue to use Linux over windows because Microsoft software sucks. Its that simple. They aren't able to do the job but they are trying to stop the people who are. This patent garbage is the latest. I have a suggestion to Steve Ballmer. Try filing your patent suite here in Canada. We'll see how far it gets then. This may fly in the US but it won't up here. If he thinks he is going to gain my support of his products by threatening my software suppliers and the technologies that makes me most productive he has another thing coming.
The Linux community should set up a Paypal account to donate towards any future legal battles. I would happily pay triple the cost of a Vista license to such a fund, as long as it operated not for profit. It would be good to have a webpage showing clearly the current balance of the fund. Its time the people built up a defense, and show companies like SCO, M$ etc how much were are prepared not to spend on them!! Now who can set up such a fund?
If Red Hat filed this lawsuit, in order to defend itself, Microsoft would have the affirmative defense of speaking the truth, but to prove it they'd have to file a counterclaim for patent infringement, then win. In other words, put their money where their big fat mouthpiece went. Then we'd really get some answers. My guess is they're trying to buy out everyone, starting with Novell, rather than sue and lose, because that would set a precedent.
Lets see now...Embrase linux and extend by claiming what they embrase has somehow become theirs?
Then there is teh halloween documents....and all the other bad things they have said about linux.
So Microsoft was really just talking about themselves?
All in all, I think Microsoft is extenguishing themselves...
They are imploding due to their exposure of their hypocracy.
And this is such a late comment nobody will see it.
No matter... I think deep down everyone already knows it, even Balmer and Bill.
I think Mr Ballmer is suffering from sarcasm and hypocrisy.
Slashdot = Sarcasm
Falling crane killed Microsoft lawyer:
A BcranecollapseLJ.46e37f9a.html
http://www.nwcn.com/topstories/stories/NW_111706W
BELLEVUE, Wash. - The man who died in when a crane crashed into his apartment Thursday evening was 31-year-old Matthew Ammon, a patent attorney for Microsoft...
...It's their own damn fault. Leave it to MS to produce an operating system (XP Home) that can't even join an MS domain, or keep MS domain credentials to a share. Gee... Mac OS can. Linux can. Man, that must really piss them off...
Well, TOUGH. While they screw around thinking up new ways to frustrate their users and admins (WGA and DRM Extreme anyone?), Linux distros like Ubuntu are really showing true innovation and value.
I've made a pledge not to install Windows on any more 'family' computers. If they want my opinion, I tell them to get a Mac. If they want to update from Windows 98, I install (X)Ubuntu - end of story. No more viruses, no more spyware, no WGA bullshit.
It amazes me how much hardware is supported now, how good OpenOffice.org has gotten, and how smooth Gnome/XFce runs - even on low end machines!
Yes, yes... MS should be scared - but they're doing it to themselves.
"...Well, there's egg and bacon; egg sausage and bacon; egg and spam; egg bacon and spam; egg bacon sausage and spam..."
I included the module that requires a minimum of two reboots before the malware^h^h^h^h^h^h^hpatches were applied
Hell, you forgot the largest example... Microsoft intentionally hired the same developer Apple hired to write Quicktime for Windows. They then told the developer, in very explicit terms, to reuse the code they wrote for Quicktime in the version of Video for Windows they were writing for Microsoft.
The end result of Apple's lawsuit against Microsoft was MS publicly investing $100 million in Apple stock (which they sold for ~200% profit, BTW), entering into a cross-license agreement covering ALL their technology, infusing their Macintosh Business Unit with almost a hundred million bucks (over an undisclosed number of years), stopping the years-old "updates can't be released until they break QuickTime" behavior, and making a "private" payment to Apple.
The next time there's an MS code leak I think the FOSS community should have tools ready that will allow non-programmers to scan for GPL-ed Open Source code. They need to be non-programmers because exposure to the code will carry the risk of 'tainting' (all your code belongs to us - Ballmer), and they need tools because it's probably quite a spaghetti..
All it takes is ONE fragment of GPL licenced code and they're toast. Just one..
The horse has bolted. Microsoft can't collect a guaranteed amount on every PC made by all-in-one OEMs like Dell any more, so now Dr Evil is trying a different tack; collecting on per-machine Linux installs.
His underlying assertion is, as usual, garbage, however. Unless Microshaft own a patent on 8086 assembler, (and this is a wild stab in the dark, but I'm guessing they don't) there is nothing within Linux that Ballmer can honestly lay claim to. It's also entirely unprovable one way or the other that Linux uses Xenix code, if they want to try and claim that. If Ballmer does conjure the ghost of Xenix here, it will be monumentally lame; it's been in mothballs ever since MS decided to go in the DOS direction back in the 80s, and if not for Linux, would remain forgotten about.
If there is one reason why I wish Microsoft would stop doing things like this though, it's because these sorts of actions continue to stoke the fear and radicalism of the FSF crazies, and give Stallman an excuse to become ever more militant. I don't worry about Microsoft succeeding in these slapstick attempts at extortion for one moment; what concerns me is the amount of fear it generates in Linux users, and the actions/perspectives that said fear causes them to take.
Sad. Just sad.
So disclose it then...
"We herby disclose that wide and frivolously granting of Software Patents is a threat to the operation of this publicly traded company. This includes unknown patents that might affect either our Microsft systems or our Linux systems. However we have not been notified of any specific patents infinged by our use of Microsoft systems or our use of Linux systems."
Don't forget to laugh!
(You are welcome)
FRA: STFU GTFO
You can do whatever you want with truly public domain materials.
This is not a signature.
Says it all:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lmbzVkZlzrc
Microsoft never "owned" the technology for what they call "windows". After MS finished pulling DOS out from under IBM's feet, they stole the GUI idea from someone. That someone was Apple. Apple owned it because they acquired it from Xerox. So, maybe it's time for Xerox to put out a distro.
Anyways, Linux is the kernel and the kernel isn't a GUI. I can't imagine any part of the kernel coming from MS but it's quite possible the kernel got help from MS employees or former employees. Would Ballmer even know a piece of code if he saw it? If he did, he would "know" there was infringement if he was willing to admit that MS'es IP was stolen in the first place.
Does it make anyone else nervous that Linus lives a stones throw from Redmond. Portland, OR is just south of Washington.
Ops, I shuld have usd the prevuwe but in.
It's called a declaratory judgement. You can sue Microsoft and claim that you do not infringe their patents. They then have to prove that you do. Its a kinda "reverse" legal play.
Note to Ballmer:
1. I run a non-Suse copy of Linux. If you have any patents that I may be infringing, please sue me, and please specify exactly which patents I am supposedly infringing.
2. I also have a copy of Novell Linux. Once you have identified your patents, I will sue Novell for violating article 7 of the GPL v.2
You want a fight? Bring it on.
Moron.
I'll trade a fresh copy of humor 2.0 for that daughter 1.0 of yours.
FRA: STFU GTFO
An engineer I am a lawyer thank God I am not. Reading this BS got me wondering the same thing. I know for a fact the UNIX Services for Microsoft is built on top of BSD code. The Berkley copyright is all though that code. I have seen it. Seems like this could be used to stomp on Balmers balls some how.
Wars for oil, Lawsuits for money and control, Lies and cons from Marketing lackies, Election machines that are more crooked than a Maifa owned one arm bandit, When will the filty rich quit fu_king the common person. Or maybe its time for the common person to kick the shit of the filty rich. Seems that every I wake up their is another filty rich asshole trying to stick a dildo up my ass and take what little money and freedoms I have.
Will it ever end?
Welcome to Nazi AmerikaWell, it was about time someone pointed out the obvious truth. Plus they got to make a cool TV show using the concept.
It sure makes a lot more sense than a bunch of nonsense about gods and angels, doesn't it?
Why is it not possible to write a completely different file sharing protocol that is installed on top of WIndows to allow interoperability with any other OS anyway?
Although reverse Engineering is 100% kosher it is very clear that using the same protocols gives amunition to MS lawyers to drag this in the mud forever (not becaus they should, but because they can. And here allow me to refer to MS as M$ to make my point clear).
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
They can admit guilt for something they don't own.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
It is not code we ar talking about here.
It is way of doings things.
MS can say they patented a certain kind of sorting an array for example, and in the idiotic US legal system, that may be valid.
And here I am quite specific. They could claim something so broad that nobody in the known univers could wrtie a program of any complexity without "infringing" on their patents.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
If Apple's OS becomes popular, MS will think about another Machiavelian plot to bring them to the ground.
The real issue here is software patents.
The time has arrived that all companies that are innovating at all (no Amazon, we are not talking about you) join forces and for once buy ^H^H^H lobby US congress people for a good reason.
Sofware patents are beneffiting absolutely nobody in the IT industry except parasites and monopolists.
IBM, SUN, HP, Apple, Adobe, SAP, Oracle. Guys, it is now or never.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
Novell just put a letter to the open source community on their web site. The full letter is here: http://www.novell.com/linux/microsoft/community_op en_letter.html
The most relevant part:
"Since our announcement, some parties have spoken about this patent agreement in a damaging way, and with a perspective that we do not share. We strongly challenge those statements here."
"We disagree with the recent statements made by Microsoft on the topic of Linux and patents. Importantly, our agreement with Microsoft is in no way an acknowledgment that Linux infringes upon any Microsoft intellectual property. When we entered the patent cooperation agreement with Microsoft, Novell did not agree or admit that Linux or any other Novell offering violates Microsoft patents."
For awhile now I've been waiting for "the other shoe to drop" with regard Novell and SuSE Linux. I think it has happened.
FTFA:
This is the crux of it - in the above quote, Ballmer is describing Microsoft's strategy to move another step closer to eliminating SuSE Linux .
So Ballmer is claiming part of any money spent on SuSE distros (Novell products in general, perhaps?) - part of the money goes to Microsoft. What better way to prevent people from buying anything from Novell/SuSE? Well, there is one better way, but it's probably realated... that would be to make SuSE sux0r - something up until very recently I consider impossible, since SuSE has been - for a coupe years now - hands down the easiest to install, Linux end-user/newbie desktop around - and yes, I don't care if you think this about the server market, etc etc blah blah - I believe Microsoft determined that SuSE constituted a threat on the desktop. THey probably figured this out around the time I was talking parents, grand-parent, and several children thru SuSE installs over the phone - this after demonstrating it to developers at work and finding that the adoption rate was quite a bit better than even *I* thought it was going to be...
However - here's why I think there is something rotten going on here:
I quit doing new installs of SuSE - not directly because of the Novell/Linux deal, but before that. I was put in a rather awkward position having told all these folks to install, because - at what had to have been almost the same time Microsoft and Novell were busy fukking and sukking each other in some sleazy hollywood hotel room, a SuSE system patch trashed the reiser file system on my 100G laptop hardrive, with no warning, and no 'thank-you-ma'am' after the fact. Data gone. No "oops, we're sorry", nothing. Just a dead computer that wouldn't boot either the SuSE install or the Windoze partition.
In fact, the drive is so thoughly trashed none of the Linux tools or the Windows tools will even look at it when I mount it on another host (I haven't tried Norton - is there still a sector editor in norton utilities? That used to work well when by 8088 machine pulled stunts like this under DOS - what 3.3? - I cringe to think what using a sector editor to recover 100G is going to be like, though ...) Anyway, this thing is looking a lot like the boot-sector virus (or whatever it was) that a Microsoft-funded cracker put on my (RedHat Linux) web-server back about 6 or 8 years ago - note that i was made painfully aware of Microsoft's "Linux research" at that time... also, note that Red Hat was already wildly popular at that time - it was probably the most popular Linux distro around - that's an important tidbit to keep in mind, here...
Anyway - back to the recent past - One other of the three machines I had running SuSE 9.x at home failed on this patch: that was a 250G SATA drive in a desktop machine - also dual boot. I pretty much had to just "wait and see" what to do about the hostile SuSE patch - I replaced the SATA drive with an old IDE I had lying around (installed SuSE 9.1), snatched the hard drive out of the Vaio and started running it off a LiveCD and a USB key (screw it - what do i need hard drive in that thing for, anyway?) - and waited. No word in any of the news sources - nothing from SuSE/Novell until this announcement about a partnership with Microsoft - and now I see.
You know, I just [while I was typing the above, in fact] realized something: The one machine that I have still running SuSE > 9.1 - the only SuSE box that didn't get trashed on that patch - is not dual boot - in fact (other than different brands of hardware), that is the onl
"The Internet is made of cats."