Slashdot Mirror
OpenSUSE Opens Up to Questions About the Microsoft Deal
NewsForge is reporting on the recent IRC meeting that the OpenSUSE team held to answer a few questions about the controversial deal between Novell and Microsoft. The most prominent questions are highlighted and the complete IRC log is available from the article while the questions that didn't make the discussion will be posted on the OpenSUSE wiki.
Microsoft asked Novell to "put together a patent agreement" so Novell could market that protection to their customers
Does Novell often pay millions of dollars for "protection" for its customers when it does not believe that the threat has any substance?
Microsoft is the one making the threats.
Novell is paying Microsoft to NOT follow through on threats that Microsoft has yet to substantiate.
Not to mention the patent battle that could erupt should Microsoft ever file a patent claim against anyone using Linux.
WTF?
Who else thinks Novell mis-underestimated the magnitude of the uproar due to this deal? This was a very bad move.
[alk]
Hm, wow, I'm convinced.
So what was the point of the deal then?
Either you'll be contributing code that you couldn't have before, meaning no one else who doesn't have a similar MS deal can use, or you'll be contributing code that you could have easily added previously anyways.
I don't get it.
Does anyone else think this sounds very illegal?
If I walked into an office and told them they needed to pay me cause there's a possibility the place might get robbed
I'd be in jail so fast it would make my head spin.
Isn't this pretty much what MS has done here?
I'd rather have a bottle in front of me than a frontal lobotomy
On the other hand, Novell may have done Free Software a great service.
All those who lambasted RMS for the explicitness of GPLv3 may now have to reconsider their opposition. This includes organizations like Red Hat and OSDL, who called the FSF approach "extremist."
Who's the extremist now?
Thanks to some opensource proponent (was it the FSF?), MS knows where to look to find infringing code in the kernel! Someone did an analysis (to prevent software patents, which was not going to work in the U.S.) to convince every linux user that patents were bad by demonstrating how the linux kernel potentially infringed on 200+ patents. You're going to say "potential," but NO opensource developer will have the $ to defend themselves against MS. I predict MS is going to start suing like a motherfucker and linux is going to go away.
How does a coder know what the specs are?
... that does NOT involve a potential software patent issue with Microsoft?
... that's the easiest way for Microsoft to get their software patents into Linux.
#1. They hack them out the way Team Samba does (yay Team Samba!!!)
#2. They read the specs that are published
#3. They "clean room" the specs.
#4. They read the specs that they've just purchased the rights to.
Anyone have any other ways?
Now, which way are the Novell coders going to use to get specs
If you're thinking "Novell just partnered with Microsoft and Microsoft can share their specs with Novell now"
And anyone who thinks that Microsoft wants to play nice with Linux has NOT been reading the history here.
If Novell will pay me a mere $4 million over the next five years, I'll promise not to sue any of their customers for any reason at all.
This offer is also open to any other companies who want to take me up on it.
I was able to attend the meeting this morning and feel the text of this slashdot story is a little misleading.
People who are unable to attend can post their questions in the wiki before the meeting (the wiki link in the article). The questions in the wiki were reviewed during the meeting, and many were addressed. Some, however, were not specifically addressed as they were answered during the live Q&A earlier in the meeting. Therefore, all of the questions (live and on the wiki) were addressed in one way or another.
That being said, I think it was great to hear from Nat directly.
-m
http://www.invisik.com
This think reads like it was scripted by the PR department.
Also, I notice that they had things rigged so that they could censor any questions they didn't like. (Reasonable, an open forum would have been a mad house, but not exactly a process that builds trust.)
They also didn't say anything about which of their customers could redistribute what. The short answer appears to be "We aren't interested in developers."
I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
Yes, that is correct.
Microsoft is paying hundreds of millions of dollars for SuSE support licenses. Far more than Novell is paying Microsoft.
Now, when was the last time anyone tried to buy SuSE from Microsoft? Has anyone here tried to? No?
Okay, when was the last time anyone called Microsoft's tech support about a SuSE issue? Has anyone here tried that? No?
Well, it seems that Microsoft paid a LOT of money for licenses that it will probably never use and didn't seem to need in the past. You might want to look up the history of the SCO lawsuit and see how Microsoft also paid for SCO licenses that Microsoft will probably never use and didn't seem to need prior to that.
So, it looks like Microsoft paid for Novell's signature on that "patent agreement". Novell couldn't say "no" to that big of an instant payoff.
Now, go back and read about Microsoft's other "partners" and how Microsoft treated them. There isn't any reason to believe that Microsoft is suddenly going to play nice and fair with Linux (or Novell). Microsoft's who business model is based upon their monopolistic control of the desktop.
Eben Moglen read our agreement and hasn't said a thing about GPLv2 violation. It's abundantly clear that he doesn't think there is any.
Instead, he and Richard are using the community energy to try to get people to adopt the previously-controversial GPLv3 (which we support also)
Hey, this is actually a cool way to get GPLv3 accepted. Reading over the log, and seeing their responses, I feel a bit better about the deal. I'm still suspicious but I'm no longer at the point where I am ready to remove openSuSE from my system and install debian.
I really hope this works out, Novell has done a lot of great things in the past and I would like to see them continue their good work.
(The Vercotti brothers enter. They wear Mafia suits and dark glasses.) ... you've got a nice army base here, Colonel. ... seven thousand infantry, six hundred artillery, and er, two divisions of paratroops. ... five bob...
Dino: (Terry Jones) Good morning, Colonel.
Colonel: Good morning gentlemen. Now what can I do for you.
Luigi: (Michael Palin) (looking round office casually) You've
Colonel: Yes.
Luigi: We wouldn't want anything to happen to it.
Colonel: What?
Dino: No, what my brother means is it would be a shame if... (he knocks something off mantel)
Colonel: Oh.
Dino: Oh sorry, Colonel.
Colonel: Well don't worry about that. But please do sit down.
Luigi: No, we prefer to stand, thank you, Colonel.
Colonel: All right. All right. But what do you want?
Dino: What do we want, ha ha ha.
Luigi: Ha ha ha, very good, Colonel.
Dino: The Colonel's a joker, Luigi.
Luigi: Explain it to the Colonel, Dino.
Dino: How many tanks you got, Colonel?
Colonel: About five hundred altogether.
Luigi: Five hundred! Hey!
Dino: You ought to be careful, Co1onel.
Colonel: We are careful, extremely careful.
Dino: 'Cos things break, don't they?
Colonel: Break?
Luigi: Well everything breaks, don't it Colonel. (he breaks something on desk) Oh dear.
Dino: Oh see my brother's clumsy Colonel, and when he gets unhappy he breaks things. Like say, he don't feel the army's playing fair by him, he may start breaking things, Colonel.
Colonel: What is all this about?
Luigi: How many men you got here, Colonel?
Colonel: Oh, er
Luigi: Paratroops, Dino.
Dino: Be a shame if someone was to set fire to them.
Colonel: Set fire to them?
Luigi: Fires happen, Colonel.
Dino: Things burn.
Colonel: Look, what is all this about?
Dino: My brother and I have got a little proposition for you Colonel.
Luigi: Could save you a lot of bother.
Dino: I mean you're doing all right here aren't you, Colonel?
Luigi: Well suppose some of your tanks was to get broken and troops started getting lost, er, fights started breaking out during general inspection, like.
Dino: It wouldn't be good for business would it, Colonel?
Colonel: Are you threatening me?
Dino: Oh, no, no, no.
Luigi: Whatever made you think that, Colonel?
Dino: The Colonel doesn't think we're nice people, Luigi.
Luigi: We're your buddies, Colonel.
Dino: We want to look after you.
Colonel: Look after me?
Luigi: We can guarantee you that not a single armoured division will get done over for fifteen bob a week.
Colonel: No, no, no.
Luigi: Twelve and six.
Colonel: No, no, no.
Luigi: Eight and six
They clearly state that they are paying up to prevent frivolous lawsuits. Furthermore, in their GPLv3 conversation, they go on to say that Redhat and HP offer the same protection, only they are agreeing to pay for the legal costs if their customers are sued. Read the whole article first.
Well.. maybe. Or Maybe not. But Definitely not sort of.
" I think people have overreacted to this deal
I guess because it involves the words "Microsoft" and "patents" "
BECAUSE, NAT, WE'VE GOT A FUCKING LAWSUIT THAT HAS BEEN GOING ON FOR OVER THREE FUCKING YEARS ASSERTING THAT THERE IS FUCKING INFRINGING IP IN LINUX AND IT HAS BEEN NOTHING MORE THAN VACUOUS STATEMENTS BACKED UP BY ABSOLUTELY NOTHING SINCE FUCKING 2003! AND NOW YOU IDIOTS SIGNED A FUCKING CONTRACT THAT IS BEING SPUN BY MICROSOFT THAT THERE ARE PROBLEMS WITH INFRINGING IP IN LINUX! WELL, FUCK YOU! WHERE THE FUCK HAS NOVELL BEEN FOR THE PAST THREE AND A HALF YEARS? I FUCKING SWEAR THAT HOVESEPIAN CAN FUCKING MESS UP MAKING A FUCKING PEANUT BUTTER SANDWICH!
I hope that's plain enough.
Goddamn, they _still_ do not get it.
--
BMO
Everyone here knows what happens to people/companies that do a deal with MS... they very quickly become deceased or owned. This simply means the final end of Suse and Novell. MS will do this one distribution at a time... or have we not learned anything from their past behavior?
Surely, it is not just me that sees this as the first step in MS owning Linux? I KNOW how paranoid that sounds, but lets get real and deal with past history, real fact, actual behaviors...
I really don't care how this gets modded, it must be said that a tiger doesn't change it's stripes, so why is MS doing this? out of kindness, or out of a desire to own Linux? While that may be paranoid at this point, look at what they stand to gain if one distribution owns up to IP issues? It will tie up all the other distributions in litigation...
I have to say, personally, I find all this 'love fest' rather dangerous indeed
Support NYCountryLawyer RIAA vs People
The issue is not what Novell intentions were or what they were thinking at the time when entering the deal, it's what the deal now allows MS to achieve. Novell just got pawned as they have now just strengthened MS ability to print FUD about Linux.
This deal was a trojan from the start. Before the ink was even dry Ballmer was screaming that they were finally getting economic return from the use of their IP in Linux and that anyone not using Suse will have an 'undisclosed balance sheet liability'. There was not a peep about how great this deal is that it now allows MS and Suse operating systems to work better, which was meant to be the *purpose* of the deal anyway.
The single best place to go for information on this ms/novell deal, best estimates of what it means to the FOSS community and the GPL is Groklaw. PJ, as usual, has put a lot of effort into gathering information, explaining legal points, providing links to more information and getting opinions form many in the community. She has about four posts up on this subject and each is worth the read.
Just my two cents worth.
Bruce
Bruce Perens.
Bruce
Protest the Novell-Microsoft Patent Agreement.
Bruce Perens.
This "our customers" language is typical of Novell's statements surrounding this issue. They constantly speak of their customers but do not speak of the wider impact on the FOSS community itself. This might sound like a non-customer asking for a handout, but the fact remains that the majority of Linux developers and users are not associated with SUSE or Novell. The fact also remains that Novell relies on the FOSS community for its development. Therefore, a patent lawsuit that caused, say, X or kernel development to be halted or altered would affect Novell as well, even though MS could claim that they have not violated the agreement.
It goes without saying that Ballmer's statements have caused harm to the FOSS community and that many more people were exposed to Ballmer's statements than Hovespan's.
I think the reason that RMS and Moglen are so incensed about this agreement is obvious. This agreement to create a de facto ownership of Linux by suing anybody who competes with Novell. If MS sues successfully for patent infringement in Application A, Novell can continue to use it without being sued, but no one else can. In this way, they can become the only non-MS people to be able to use it in consequence of their "get out of jail free" card. It is an end run around the GPL.
Both MS and Novell benefit from this. Novell destroys its competition in the Linux arena and becomes the only "legitimate" Linux vendor. MS reduces its competitors to one complacent one which it can dispatch at its lesiure or use to prove that MS is not a monopoly.
In light of this, Novell only has two options if it truly believes in FOSS:
Whether Novell sees this future or not, it is screwing the Linux community. And garbage like this:
All data is speech. All speech is Free.
Do me a favor. Take your anger here for a moment and help me out, if you haven't done so yet. But no F-words there, please, it would detract from the document. Even if Novell tosses it off, it's point is already made to a lot of Novell users and VARs and investors and the press. They've been calling me.
Bruce
Bruce Perens.
Code which practices an algorithm or other technique which is claimed in a patent owned by MS. And MS knows it, and now it's in your program. Sounds risky.
Bruce
Bruce Perens.
And IBM is pouring millions upon tens of millions into Linux's side of said vacuous case. While Novell crows about their 30 pieces of silver.
you had me at #!
Microsoft's lawyer goons promise not to bust you up if, and only if, you buy from their bitch Novell.
The Mob only wishes there were smooth enough to pull off crap like this.
Is that a SCSI connector or are you just glad to see me?
Novell has not provided any useful precedent or other legal ammunition that ANYONE can use in ANY court case. We didn't acknowledge that there are any MS patents infringed by Linux. So this court case you're screaming about is totally unaffected by the Novell/MS deal. Microsoft has been spreading FUD that Linux infringes MS IP for years -- nothing changed in that respect here.
Another point I want to make. Open Source Risk Management is a company that makes its money by selling insurance on Linux IP infringement. So if you're worried that Linux infringes someone's IP, you buy their products. Two years ago OSRM went off and funded a study by Dan Ravicher -- whose PubPat is in my view a great organization -- that looked at Linux to determine whether it actually violates anyone's software patents. Then in August of 2004 (a few months after Bruce Perens joined their board, I might add), OSRM published a study stating that Linux infringes 283 patents, 27 from Microsoft. You can read about it here:
http://news.com.com/Group+Linux+potentially+infri
Here is a company that sells Linux IP insurance and therefore directly benefits financially from people's fear over Linux patent FUD, so they publish these ominous statements about Linux infringing hundreds of patents! This is realy work done by real people to examine specific patents and determine whether Linux infringes them or not.
On the other hand you have Novell who make NO such statement, who directly contradict Microsoft in the press when Ballmer goes off and says things like this.
So pardon me, but I think it's worth looking at the whole picture here.
Source: Wikipedia, Concurrent Versions System.
"It ain't a war against drugs.it's a war against personal freedom" --Bill Hicks