Slashdot Mirror
So What If Linux Infringes On Microsoft IP?
Mr Men writes to mention a ZDNet blog entry by Adrian Kingsley-Hughes wondering aloud if maybe, just maybe, Microsoft isn't lying about having patents that are part of Linux. "Come on, no matter how much of a Linux fan you are, you have to admit that there's at least a chance that Linux does indeed infringe on Microsoft's patents. After all, Microsoft does hold a lot of patents and while Linux is open source and we can all take a look at the source code, only Microsoft has access to most of its source code so it isn't all that difficult for it to prove — to itself at any rate — that there are IP infringements contained in Linux. After all, before IBM handed over some 500 patents to the open source community, it's pretty clear that Linux was infringing some of them. Given that, why is it so hard to believe that the same isn't going on with Microsoft?" Even then, he goes on to say, so what if they do? It's not like they're going to go after us with a 'Linux tax.' Kingsley-Hughes imagines that, for the most part, Microsoft is just going to sit on this info and use it to form more and more profitable deals. Better than the alternative, I guess.
But they still play the game and pretend they're legitimate, because they somehow think they'll benefit, in the end, using them to crush current and potential competition with multi-million legal actions and the threat thereof.
No. Microsoft only holds patents to counter lawsuits from companies like Eolas. (Or whatever their name was.) It is not Microsoft's policy to aggressively sue other companies for patent infringements, and Microsoft actively campaigns for patent reform whenever they have a chance.
Of course, nobody will bother to believe the truth on this site because Microsoft is "evil."
Comment of the year
I'm not laughing at the eventuality that there will be a day that Microsoft will be no more (though that length of time is undetermined and is likely to be longer than any of our lifetimes).
But the prevalent idea amongst fanatics that Linux will be the successor to the throne is absolutely hilarious. Innovation is a concept. Software patents are a legal construct. You don't beat well tested legal constructs with concepts, and you can't win the argument by telling the judge that you didn't patent something because you're just against the idea of patents.
Linux itself is both trademarked and copyrighted. Why is is ok for the creator to say that nobody else can use the term without his permission, or use the code without obeying the license, but horrible for someone else who has created something to take the third step and protect his work with a patent? It isn't about innovation at all. It's about wanting to take something for nothing because it suits your purpose, because without circumventing the law, you CAN'T compete against those who are willing to pay for it.
Besides, the sheer difficulty that the average user faces in simply getting a Linux distribution to work correctly with their hardware proves that the community isn't really about innovation at all, because IF IT WERE, it'd be looking into making their tools as easy to use as the competition, which still wouldn't level the playing field, but would at least show that they're interested in trying. Their actions and attitudes betray them every single time.