Microsoft Getting Paid for Patents in Linux?

kripkenstein noted an Interview with Jeremy Allison where the interviewer asks 'One of the persistent rumors that's going around is that certain large IT customers have already been paying Microsoft for patent licensing to cover their use of Linux, Samba and other free software projects.' and Jeremy responds "Yes, that's true, actually. I mean I have had people come up to me and essentially off the record admit that they had been threatened by Microsoft and had got patent cross license and had essentially taken out a license for Microsoft patents on the free software that they were using [...] But they're not telling anyone about it. They're completely doing it off the record."

Comments

Why shouldn't they ?

[Space cowboy]

Yes, I know, software patents are the spawn of Satan, no-one (not even me, actually :-) likes them. The point is, though, that software patents are currently completely legal, and any owner of such is going to exploit that. Why would anyone expect anything different ?

I'm nowhere near a fanboy for Microsoft (quite the opposite, if you read my posting history), but in this case, I can't see they've done anything *wrong*. You can argue that software patents are bad - yes, agreed. You can argue that these particular patents are flawed, perhaps they are. You can argue that it's just not moral to profit from the work of others, and yes I agree with that too.

But, sadly, what they're doing appears to be legal, so perhaps the ire ought to be directed at what makes it legal, rather than shooting the messenger (dammit :-).

Simon (ducking)

Re:Why shouldn't they ?

[numbski]

D'oh. Found my answer:

http://ubiqx.org/cifs/SMB.html

"Like NetBIOS, the Server Message Block protocol originated a long time ago at IBM. Microsoft embraced it, extended it, and in 1996 gave it a marketing upgrade by renaming it "CIFS"."

Short answer: I have it backwards. SMB is the "open" one. CIFS is what you get after MS does their embrace and extend act on it. Ooops. Sorry for the misinformation!

Plausible, but no proof

[daeg]

While the idea is plausible and scary, where's the proof? If I were being threatened by Microsoft, I'd sure as hell make it public. What better way to defend yourself than getting support of the entire Linux/Free Software community?

Re:Plausible, but no proof

[DarkOx]

Its a nice thought and as a private organization or individual it might make sense but its not going to make sense to lots of corporate decision makers. Publicly admiting the Microsoft is threating to sue you is *Not* going to help your stock price any. Changes are you own some stock in the business yourself, so there is even a personal motiviation. Also there is going to be a long and costly legal battle if you decide to go the mat with M$. You can't afford to half ass your defense, if you lose its gonna really hurt so the only option is win, that is going to take dollars that you may not want to spend, because you could use them to be otherwise competivie, or you might not even have those dollars.

No for most public companies its going to be cheaper to bow to M$ extortion, hint M$ will customize their demands so that is the case, then to fight them. Its no surpise at all M$ can basically shake down corporate FOSS users. Until the patent/copyright situation is really resolved and sadly I don't think the SCO case is going to fully resolve it, especially the patent side, M$ can bully anyone they want.

Which is exactly what Novell was trying to stop ostensibly, although I think their motives were far less pure personaly.

NFS is easier anyways

[tomstdenis]

No big loss. NFS is easier to use, has real file permissions, etc.

Just another "innovation" from MSFT [smb] that they'll try to horde instead of playing the "let's weigh in on technical merits" game.

And for fuck sake, why doesn't Windows support NFS? It makes mixing boxes on a lan such a bitch ... oh wait ... I get it.

Tom

Alternatively, you take file serving away from MS

[Colin Smith]

Write a free cross platform client and server network filesystem which runs on Windows, OSX, Unix, Linux and which uses an open standard for locking, authentication, encryption, ACLs etc.

Leaving file serving in MS's control simply leaves you open to patent infringement etc.

Legitimate Businessman's Civic Improvement Cmte...

[mikelieman]

Would like to discuss your annual donation...

Rocco and Knuckles will be by to pick up the envelope.

Think of the Shareholders

[virtigex]

Do publicly traded companies have to report this kind of thing? I would be quite concerned if a company whose stock I own was paying money under the table to organizations that had been found guilty of criminal acts. Does anybody have an idea of what companies are doing this, so that they can be asked in a stockholders' meeting.

Everyone, out of the pool!!!

[libkarl2]

I have yet to hear of any evidence, *ever* in the history of computing, where software patents were anything more than the proverbial Turd In The Swimming Pool(tm). You CAN'T polish a turd! Plate it with gold and voila -- it's STILL a turd!

As Floaters ensure that only the most discusting little kids ever use the swimming pool, Software Patents ensure that only the biggest, most amoral lawyer infested companies thrive in the tech industry.

Re:fuck IP and MS and everybody

[Colz Grigor]

Dear sir,

I regret to inform you that the firm which I represent has acquired a patent on "the desire of shooting people in the motherfucking head" technology, which you've included in your most recent post to Slash Dot.

The licensing fee for this technology is $100, however the penalty fee for utilizing the technology without first having acquired a license is $900, so we will be collecting $1,000 from you post haste.

::Colz Grigor

If you do that....

[jotaeleemeese]

... you can as well hand over your company to Microsoft and do something else. Like flipping burgers.

If you think the shares of a company going open about something like this would tank, I would like to see what would be the result for MS shares (whose price had remained pretty flat for some time now).

I think this article is baseless, but it is nice weekend speculation, conspiracy theories and all that.

But then again, if somebody would have described SCO's actions before they started their disgraceful charade, few would have believed it.

IBM and other Linux OEMs?

[javacowboy]

Wouldn't you think that IBM, HP, and other large Linux server sellers would be a little annoyed at Microsoft shaking down their customers? The more their customers get shaken down, the less like IBM and all would get repeat business, right?

I would think that IBM could charge Microsoft with Racketeering (which is essentially what MS is doing) on behalf of their Linux customers.

Maybe the average corporation doesn't have the clout to stand up to Microsoft, but IBM does.

(Note: I'm not really a big IBM fan. I'm just pointing out that Microsoft isn't infallible).

Re:fuck IP and MS and everybody

[Elektroschock]

It is much cheaper to invest in lobbying against software patenting. Europe tells a lesson here. It is just a matter of ressources. Support the anti-softpatent movement.