Novell Injects MS Lawsuit Exploit Into Open Office

F.M. Petain writes, "It looks like Microsoft's first move in the 'Linux owes us' game is to move a Pawn. A few days ago, a Novell programmer, Noel Power, submitted patches to add VBA compatibility to Open Office's spreadsheet module. This is great for people trying to convert the business desktop from closed source to open source, but is this gift really a ticking time bomb? What happens when Microsoft declares that the VBA code was stolen?" The patches may have been submitted only a few days ago, but the code must be considerably older; the article claims that nine distros in adition to SUSE already support the VBA extensions in their versions of Open Office. (Linux.com and Slashdot are both part of OSTG.)

Comments

So...

[diegocgteleline.es]

Now I can run pretty much any visual basic program (one of the most used languages in the Real World) under linux and hence switch many people to linux, but people prefers to title it as "novell may be doing some dirty things"

It's amazing how one of the most wonderful news I've heard in months can become FUD. Wake up: Patents already existed before the novell-MS pact. Microsoft has been able to sue companies for years. Getting VBA compatibility is a Good Thing. I only can thank Novell for this code.

Novell Injects MS Lawsuit Exploit lmao

[Randall311]

Pure paranoia is the only way to describe this. Linux is not a threat to Microsoft's empire in the least. I can't believe you all get so paranoid when new functionality emerges that supports some (ancient) Microsoft-supported format. I guarantee you Microsoft doesn't give a fuck who uses their shitty old no longer supported format. Why else do you think they opened it up?

Is this it?

[Anonymous Coward]

As I read through the Slashdot article I realized that if this is the mirror of the Linux, I'll pass it. Seriously people, first you bitch because there is no support for this and that, 100% compatibility with the stuff that comes from Redmond is currently little more than dream and when someone takes the first step needed to get that compatibility you crucify them? Wtf? I have the deepest appreciation for the people who actually *develop* Linux and the world around the kernel but I'm starting to really hate this so called community. To me you are nothing more than a bunch of fucking wankers who sit around and do little more than bitch all day.

Oh BTW, you all knowing FUD submitter, the reason the patches have not been applied to the OOo source before is because it's so massive it would delay the 2.0.4 release. But hey, then you'd bitch somewhere about OOo 2.0.4 getting delayed because of some patch that you, personally, don't need.

Some people proudly state here that their next computer won't run Vista, SUSE or whatever is the thing you happen to hate that day so here's a little something: my next computer probably won't run Linux either.

Again, if this is the future of the community "just say no, kids!"

Then demonstrate it.

[khasim]

Of course, but how is it more likely to occur in this case than in any other open source project?

You mean such as the Linux kernel? Well ..... I'd have to say "a whole fucking lot".

Because Novell and MS are both involved (although only Novell directly)?

Yes. In fact, that was covered in the comment on this posted on the front page of /.

I'm just not ready to take that as proof of poison.

The "proof" comes after the poison is ingested.

Sorry, but I'm not willing to demonstrate that. Perhaps you are?

This module was first documented a year ago from what I can tell. See the history on this wiki page: http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/VBA

Yes, it was.

And it was pushed by Noel Power at Novell.

But it was not accepted upstream. Now Novell is trying to push it upstream. That is the problem. This is not a problem as long as it is not included in the official, upstream tree.

While it seems that Novell does maintain and develop the code now, I'm sure somebody familiar with the ooo-build repository can track down the original author(s).

And the point of that would be ... ?

You'd have to show that the original code was pretty much complete and submitted by someone with no link to Microsoft. And that Novell has just been adding bug fixes and no additional functionality.

Good luck with that.

Meanwhile, it's a lot less effort and a lot safer just to reject this. Novell can do whatever it wants to do. I just cannot get its submissions accepted upstream.

Re:Now we're screwed...

[marcello_dl]

You don't like Stallman? Just don't write GPL code, and if you're not an hypocrite don't use any, even. As simple as that. It's not like Stallman forces hardware makers to ship with an OS preloaded, engages in constant monopoly abuse, spreads FUD about competing products, creates an entire market for security products because his OS is full of holes.