Slashdot Mirror


Microsoft Patent Deal Could Leave Novell Behind

robbyyy writes to mention a Computer Business Review Online article about commentary from Bruce Perens to Novell, about their recent deal with Microsoft. He argues that the company should quickly turn its back on the deal, because Novell risks being left behind by open source progress. From the article: "While Linux creator Linus Torvalds has previously stated that the Linux kernel will remain on the GPL v2 license, much of the code that makes up a complete Linux distribution is owned by the FSF, which intends to re-license all its code to GPL v3 as soon as it is completed in early 2007. 'In the face of these changes, Novell will probably be stuck with old versions of the software, under old licenses, with Novell sustaining the entire cost and burden of maintaining that software,' Perens wrote, adding that Novell faces a choice of sticking with Microsoft and being left behind, or turning its back on the patent deal."

4 of 246 comments (clear)

  1. Re:FSF owns what? by peragrin · · Score: 5, Informative

    A lot. Apparently you have never paid attention to the software copyright that you use. That's okay that's why the GPL is good you don't have to.

    All the GNU tools bash, cp, mv, rm, etc have copyrights owned by the FSF. if you donate code to those projects you are "encouraged" to donate the copyrights to the FSF. Samba, Linux kernel, and other tools have their copyrights assigned to various other people.

    the FSF is the single largest copyright holder of GPL software. IBM is working on doing the same thing with their software donations, and if Sun GPL's Java and Open Solaris then they will jump in the pool as well.

    --
    i thought once I was found, but it was only a dream.
  2. Re:FSF owns what? by jonasj · · Score: 4, Informative
    You don't get it, let me explain:

    WTF? I know its GNU/Linux...but it does not mean that FSF "owns" it.
    Of course it does. FSF owns the copyright on the essential GNU software (coreutils, compiler, etc).

    And I dont believe that the GPLv2 to GPLv3 transition will leed to a gap between GPLv2 and GPLv3 userlands.
    GPLv3 forbids deals like this, so it is illegal for Novell to distribute any software under GPLv3. Therefore they will have to stick with the last versions released under GPLv2.
    --
    You know, Microsoft's street address also says a lot about their mentality.
  3. Re:Scam. It's a scam. by TortiusMaximus · · Score: 4, Informative

    >>Novell and Bruce Perens aren't the bad guys here, they just got scammed (Please, for the sake of the future of Novell, please don't forward Bruce any emails that state the Prince of Nigeria needs some cash to escape the country). I don't understand why you think that Bruce Perens got scammed... he's the one sounding the alarm!

  4. Re:How can the GPL v3 change this by ookaze · · Score: 3, Informative

    I don't see how the GPL v3 can force a certain behaviour on MS

    That's because it can't.

    Novell is not giving their customers any rights beyond those Novell or anybody else has. If there is a valid MS patent, suddenly nobody has the right to distribute or use the code.
    THe only thing special is MS promised not to sue Novell cutomers


    Mmmh no !
    Nobody has the right to distribute or use the code IF MS says so.
    The problem is that if most of the base OS becomes GPLv3, and Novell uses it, it will pass any patent related agreement (like "promise not to sue") to every FOSS users of the software that has the problem. This would break their contract, or prevent them from using the GPLv3 software.
    As most of the code in a distro like Suse comes from outside, they're in for a rude awakening then.