Slashdot Mirror


Novell Responds To Microsoft's IP Claims

Azul writes "Ron Hovsepian, Novell's CEO, has posted an open letter to the Community, where he explicitly states Novell's disagreement with Steve Ballmer's claims of Linux infringing on Microsoft's intellectual property. From the letter: '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.'"

16 of 317 comments (clear)

  1. Novell might actually be fueling MS's case ... by Josh+Lindenmuth · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Isn't the following statement in effect confirming Ballmer's ascertation that Linux users are violating Microsoft's patents?

    "In this agreement, Novell and Microsoft each promise not to sue the other's customers for patent infringement. The intended effect of this agreement was to give our joint customers peace of mind that they have the full support of the other company for their IT activities."

    If Novell did not believe that Linux users were accountable to Microsoft for using these technologies, why would they look to protect these users? Sure, it's great to offer this indemnification clause for the largest of corporate clients (who have at least some reason to be cognizant of the risk of MS litigation), but by doing so he seems validate Ballmer's views.

    I can see it now ... The next big legal battle will be Microsoft vs. the world.

    --
    Huh? Don't mind me, I'm just the new guy.
    1. Re:Novell might actually be fueling MS's case ... by ldj · · Score: 5, Insightful
      The best move would be for users to ditch distributions that do not provide patent indemnification or to seek out third-party indemnification. If anything, Novell ought to be cheering Ballmer for steering more people in their direction.
      I think the best move would be for people to revolt against the silly software patent insanity and refuse to play that game. The sooner we bring the software patent stew to a boil, the sooner we can move towards a balanced and healthy legal system in which to grow new technologies.
      --
      Open Source: I'll show you mine if you show me yours.
    2. Re:Novell might actually be fueling MS's case ... by Fnkmaster · · Score: 5, Insightful

      And for a company that broke even last year on an operating income of $100M and has a total market cap of about $2B dollars, that payment was not at all a trivial matter. Hovsepian would have been remiss to his shareholders to not sign it. Patent cross-licensing agreements are pretty damned commonplace.

      I think the Novell guys probably realized there was some bad PR potential, but didn't see anything particularly bad in the agreement and saw lots and lots of greenbacks, plus the opportunity to use MS as a distribution channel. This seemed like a sweet deal when they looked at it. I just don't think they realized quite how negative the reaction would be.

  2. Deal Novell Out by Frosty+Piss · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Novell is feeling the backlash of their decision to cozy up to Microsoft, but this is just spin, it means nothing. The business arrangements that Novell made with Microsoft are what counts, and they still stand. It's time to deal Novell out of the Open Source pie, we must not allow them to taint Linux with "Microsoft IP".

    --
    If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
    1. Re:Deal Novell Out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting
      I work for SUSE/Novell and my job involves working on GPL'd software.

      Do you really think that Microsoft is going to be handing us source code to their proprietary applications? Seriously? Because that's not ever going to happen and I'm not sure what makes you think that it would. I mean, this is Microsoft we're talking about. They don't even like to share source internally from what I hear, and none of us have any interest in seeing closed source in the first place.

      Do you really think that any of us engineers, us "jerk-off[s] from Novell", are going to intentionally harm Linux? Seriously? The same Linux that many of us use at work and at home, the same Linux that many of us have been using for upwards of sixteen years? No, we're not going to intentionally "open the flood gates for M$ litigation" because that doesn't make any sense. I know, I know, you're enjoying the hysterics and you don't actually know what's going on so you're stirring up the pot all the same, but, really, why would we do that? Honestly, ask yourself, why would those of us who get to have the dream job of writing open source software intentionally poison Linux? Calm down.

  3. Encouraged... by TropicalCoder · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I for one feel at least encouraged by the fact that obviously Novel is very sensitive to criticism over this. I would like to even believe that they are reading Slashdot. If nothing else, that would be a very positive development. If major players and decision makers begin reading Slashdot and become sensitive to it, that would be a very positive thing for us all. Though the first few comments to this latest news show considerable skepticism, many others in previous discussions had come to the conclusion that there is really nothing to worry about.

  4. Re:Give Novell a Break by cryptoluddite · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Alienating Novell sends a signal that Microsoft's patent extortion will not be tolerated by the community. It says that, should Microsoft press patent claims, that companies and people using Linux will retaliate -- with countersuits, civil disobedience, lobbying, bad PR, and whatever else.

    You can bet that Novell is only coming out with this "open letter" because of the pressure they are feeling. Contracts being canceled or not renewed, bile and bad PR everywhere, FSF lawyers looking into filing suits, etc. They are probably getting the most pressure from SuSE developers, who can't be at all happy about being periahs.

    The best step for the OSS community would be for Microsoft to document their protocols and formats. For instance if we had documentation on how NTFS lays out the filesystem we'd have a safe r/w driver in under a month. This Novell-MS deal is bunk. The European trustbusters have already done more than this deal ever will.

  5. Microsoft Bites Back - MS PR response to this by samrolken · · Score: 5, Informative
    They've agreed to disagree, or so they say.
    We at Microsoft respect Novell's point of view on the patent issue, even while we respectfully take a different view. Novell is absolutely right in stating that it did not admit or acknowledge any patent problems as part of entering into the patent collaboration agreement. At Microsoft we undertook our own analysis of our patent portfolio and concluded that it was necessary and important to create a patent covenant for customers of these products. We are gratified that such a solution is now in place.
    http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/press/2006/nov0 6/11-20Statement.mspx
    --
    samrolken
  6. Groklaw's reaction ... by Augusto · · Score: 5, Informative

    http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=200611202 03431766

    In that case, with all due respect, you should not have signed an agreement called a patent cooperation agreement that gives Microsoft the opportunity to say the things Mr. Ballmer has been saying. I believe that is obvious now. And you should have considered the GPL, its importance to the community, and considered what paying royalties means in that context. And we hope you will fix this.

    And MS ...

    Microsoft and Novell have agreed to disagree on whether certain open source offerings infringe Microsoft patents and whether certain Microsoft offerings infringe Novell patents....

    We at Microsoft respect Novell's point of view on the patent issue, even while we respectfully take a different view. Novell is absolutely right in stating that it did not admit or acknowledge any patent problems as part of entering into the patent collaboration agreement. At Microsoft we undertook our own analysis of our patent portfolio and concluded that it was necessary and important to create a patent covenant for customers of these products. We are gratified that such a solution is now in place.

    --

    - sigs are for wimps.
  7. Re:trouble ahead?, trouble behind. by grub · · Score: 5, Interesting


    Unlike with Windows, I doubt Microsoft could pull it off though ... the Linux advocates are too anti-Redmond to adopt a M$ linux clone.

    The advocates (zealots?) wouldn't be the target market. MS would market it to the MCSEs and other who are MS-centric as 'Linux Done Right', offer full MS support, ease of installation and a sole-source supplier (MS themselves).

    It would make MS billions of dollars.

    --
    Trolling is a art,
  8. That's bullshit. by khasim · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Maybe, but corporate clients need interoperability, and this relationship will eventually provide them with a greater degree of Windows/Linux interop than they have today (while providing them with some of the legal protections they desire).

    Microsoft has 100% access to the source code for Windows AND for Linux. If Microsoft wanted "interoperability" then Microsoft is in the best possible position to just do it.

    And Microsoft can release any specs at any time so Linux could implement "interoperability" improvements.

    The fact that Microsoft does not do either should tell you all you need to know about the "interoperability" bullshit.
  9. Rule of thumb... by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 5, Insightful

    A rule of thumb when dealing with Microsoft.

    Microsoft ALWAYS shafts their partners.

    I've watched it happen repeatedly with big-name and little-guy companies here in the valley, and seen news of it elsewhere.

    Cutting a deal with Microsoft is an invitation to big trouble and I fail to see how companies keep falling for it. (Perhaps there IS something to the PHB stereotype.)

    Cutting a deal with Microsoft for (limited) licensing of their patents is an invitation to accusations of IP infringement - and the first shoe has just dropped.

    But (like reading Microsoft source code) it's also an invitation to accidentally contaminating the open-source code base with actual Microsoft IP.

    I expect THAT to be the second shoe - with Microsoft first FUDding up the customers, then going after Linux ala SCO, but with their ducks correctly aligned before filing the first suit.

    --
    Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
  10. Dead Licence Sketch by NZheretic · · Score: 5, Funny

    A customer enters a Novell Office.
    Mr. Praline: 'Ello, I wish to register a complaint.
    (Novell does not respond.)
    Mr. Praline: 'Ello, Miss?
    Novell: What do you mean "miss"?
    Mr. Praline: I'm sorry, I have a cold. I wish to make a complaint!
    Novell: We're closin' for lunch.
    Mr. Praline: Never mind that, my lad. I wish to complain about this Linux Distro what I purchased not half an hour ago from this very boutique.
    Novell: Oh yes, the, uh, the Novell OpenSuse Linux...What's,uh...What's wrong with it?
    Mr. Praline: I'll tell you what's wrong with it, my lad. According to the terms of the GPL you can no longer distribute it, that's what's wrong with it!
    Movell: No, no, it's uh,... part of the service agreement.
    Mr. Praline: Look, matey, I know a violation of the GPL when I see one, and I'm looking at one right now.
    Novell: No no it not violated, it's , it's cirumvented'! Remarkable OS, the Suse Linux, idn'it, ay? Beautiful eye candy with GLX
    Mr. Praline: The eye candy don't enter into it. your in violation of the GPL.
    Novell: Nononono, no, no! it's just slightly cirumvented!
    ...

  11. Unfortunately CEO cannot be trusted by mattr · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I gave the man the benefit of the doubt, even though I am extremely angry at Novell, and read his letter. It is very well written and makes the reader think, "Oh, that's all right then". But it isn't. He is not acting in a vaccuum and this is not a textbook case study (yet). Why?
    1. Novell obviously needed cash quite badly, enough to risk a PR backlash.
    2. Microsoft was a key driver behind SCO and this is their next highly visible move against Linux.
    3. Microsoft has linux people in-house. If they wanted linux they could make their own distro for free, plus hiring a team to add interoperability which presumably should be easy since they would be the only team on the planet with the inside knowledge of how to do that.
    4. Of course, this expert knowledge would be copied by other distros if it was GPL, so they wouldn't want to do that.
    5. And, they wouldn't be able to easily infect other distros a la SCO, which is another reason.
    6. Finally, if they distribute GNU/Linux under GPL then they are finally saying everything is already under the GPL. (possibly including nonencumbrance by patents but IANAL).
    7. Novell cannot leash the dragon once it begins to rampage. In fact, this patent agreement clearly removes potential weapons of OSS-friendly vendors like IBM against possible future SCO-like lititgation from Microsoft. It means that Novell may likely enter the role of indeminifying vendors and users against Microsoft litigation (if the patent agreement allows that).
    8. Novell's CEO claims their actions prove they are honorably. I am sure he would like to think so. However if actions are louder than words, then surely this deal with Microsoft proves Novell is only in business for Novell, especially if it means all other OSS vendors get poisoned by their actions.
    9. It also proves that Novell's CEO is intellectually and/or ethically unfit for his position due to his blithe ignorance of SCO and Microsoft's role in SCO, smoking gun and all.
    10. The only reason imaginable is that Novell is really on the brink of bankruptcy and some threat from Microsoft would push them over the edge. Possibly Novell has some proof of OSS in Windows but who will ever know? Novell's actions cast a pall of smoke and brimstone over all OSS-related activities, projects, and products they have.
    11. Unfortunately this makes me and lots of other people very scared of what may end up in Suse and strongly suggests that Novell will be Microsoft's key tool for attempting again to destroy Linux and the OSS world, no matter what Novell ever says.
    12. That is why Novell cannot be trusted, and anything they ever contribute to OSS projects must be painstakingly analyzed and thrown in the garbage at the least worry. Even so, there is no way to be sure anything they offer will not be either a fragment of patentable data, or a fragment of a potential vulnerability to either access from microsoft or attack by a windows virus. It would be a much different story if Microsoft was going to provide all necessary documentation and experienced OSS programmers could plan how to interface with those APIs for best performance and security. Of course the same goes for anybody who ever thought of buying Novell or maybe making a contract with Novell. I don't see how anybody can ever trust Novell again.

  12. Woot! Woot! Clue Train in the distance by stox · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Dear Novell Executives:

    How many company's have entered into collaborations, with Microsoft, that did not end up with a rectal aperture far exceeding that of goatse? How many did? So, do you actually fell that lucky? Talk about a long shot. Well, I'm sure you are all busy packing your golden parachutes, and will be long gone before the fecal matter hits the rotary device.

    --
    "To those who are overly cautious, everything is impossible. "
  13. Let me get this straight. by khasim · · Score: 5, Insightful
    The problem is, you're wrong.

    So Microsoft has released the specs to allow Linux to interoperate with Windows? Tell me more ...

    Now, granted, these are not the keys to the Windows kingdom, but it's a step in the right direction, and Microsoft should be encouraged to get as many specs out into the Open as possible, as soon as possible.

    So by "interoperate" you mean ... "not interoperate"

    And by "you're wrong" you mean ... I'm actually correct.

    Come back when Microsoft opens up NTFS or Active Directory, okay? Or even when Microsoft has 100% support for ODF, as a default option, out of the box.

    Like I said, Microsoft has access to all of the Linux code AND all of the Microsoft code.

    Microsoft can open any spec it wants, whenever it wants.

    Any other talk about "interoperability" is pure bullshit.