Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Mr. Ballmer, Show Us the Code

Posted by kdawson on from the open-letter dept.

DigDuality writes "A new campaign, Showusthecode.com, requests every leader in the Linux world, and companies invested in Linux, to stand up and demand that Steve Ballmer show the world where Linux violates Microsoft's intellectual property. He has been making these claims since the Novell-Microsoft deal. If Microsoft answers this challenge — by May 1st — then Linux developers will be able to modify the code so that it remains 'free' software. If such infringing code doesn't exist, we will have called Microsoft's bluff. And if the campaign garners enough attention and if Steve Ballmer maintains silence, then the community and companies behind Linux can take the silence for the admission that it is."

16 of 462 comments (clear)

  1. I like those odds..... by LibertineR · · Score: 5, Funny
    Billions and billions of dollars and an army of lawyers in one corner:

    A group with an idea and a web site in the other:

    I like their spirit, but my best advice would be......RUN Bitches!

    1. Re:I like those odds..... by MindKata · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I don't think Microsoft would do this, but as linux is open source, it would also be possible (in theory) to do the reverse of what you suggest and plant small routines from Microsoft code into sections of Linux. Of course that assumes someone working for Microsoft could get the code sections past other programmers reviewing the new Linux code, but it could be done.

      I don't think Microsoft would try this to win any kind of legal action against Linux, (especially as a lot of people are watching the code), but I wouldn't put it past someone trying this kind of stunt from other companies with some open source software. Sadly it seems with corrupt human thinking, anything is possible in the pursuit of their goals, especially where that goal is money and/or power.

      Its like the old saying ... "All's fair in love and war" .. that should be "All's fair in love, war and business" ... although the use of the word fair in that saying seems almost like positive PR to say, do anything unfair you can to get ahead. So its not really fair at all.

      The interesting thing is most humans are not like this (most people have empathy and ethics) but there are enough bad ones who are like this, to make everyone suspicious of the actions of others.

      --
      There are 10 kinds of people in the world... those who understand binary and those who don't.
    2. Re:I like those odds..... by WalksOnDirt · · Score: 5, Insightful

      While that is true, this whole discussion has been muddied by the use of the imprecise term "intellectual property" in the blurb. I think this is more about patents than copyright, which makes the GPL issues here moot.

      --
      a,e,i,o,u and sometimes w and y (at be if of up cwm by)
  2. It's pointless for Microsoft to reply by sup2100 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    As long as the truth is not known, microsoft can keep on threatening. If microsoft does prove some sort of infingement then they have to sue or else they will loose their threat as linux is changed. As such microsoft would never reply to it.

  3. General Public... by BlueCollarCamel · · Score: 5, Funny

    And if the campaign garners enough attention and if Steve Ballmer maintains silence, then the community and companies behind Linux can take the silence for for the admission that it is. And the general public still won't give a damn.
    --
    1&1 - Cheap domain and web hosting.
  4. Sorry guys... by Saedrael · · Score: 5, Insightful

    But the text on that website is extremely unprofessional; it reads more like a rant than an open letter to Ballmer. Grammatical mistakes abound, as does use of slang. I'm all for the idea, but it has to be pursued in a manner such that there is some chance of Microsoft responding.

  5. OK, here's an example by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Patent #5845280, "Method and apparatus for transmitting a file in a network using a single transmit request from a user-mode process to a kernel-mode process". Compare this with the Linux (and BSD) SendFile() API.

    Yep, that's a patent violation.

  6. Re:Why do they even need the code? by iPaul · · Score: 5, Informative

    I would be stunned if Linux doesn't "infringe" on some patent that Microsoft holds. There have been so many patents issued for so many crap ideas that it may be impossible to build anything without infringing on someone's patent. (And in some cases two people hold different patents covering the same thing). The patent in question could be as *stupid* and possibly *indefensible* as "method of communicating with a computer using a keyboard." But they won't fire a shot. Get used to phrases such as "Our attourneys are examining the matter and we don't want to comment on possible litigation." Also get used to Microsoft trying to decide how to pursue the matter, and there are so many ways. It will scare off business users, who might be considering 10,000 desktop roll-outs, to pass on Linux to avoid lawsuits. If they actually go to court they could loose (and it would cost s lot of money). IANAL, but I would imagine they would start building a case by threatening vendors into a Novel style deal, if they actually do anything at all.

    --
    Leave the gun, take the cannoli -- Clemenza, The Godfather
  7. Good idea bad implementation... by Eric+Damron · · Score: 5, Interesting

    But that's what Open Source is about. Taking a good idea and improving the implementation! Rather than bitch about how unprofessional the website is lets take the idea and polish the implementation.

    Ideas people?

    --
    The race isn't always to the swift... but that's the way to bet!
  8. This is so dumb. It's a patent issue. by Animats · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "Show us the code" is the wrong question here. "Show us the patent numbers" is the right question. The guy behind this has no clue.

  9. Good Odds. by twitter · · Score: 5, Insightful

    my best advice would be......RUN Bitches!

    It's nice to know what corner you are in but your reasons for being there are flawed, as is your entire analogy. You can't expect to be protected by a bully, no matter how strong they might appear. Sooner or later, they will make you pay for your mistaken and mean spirited loyalty.

    The problem with all of the FUD is that it's becoming increasingly evident that M$ is threatening everyone. A business that threatens it's customers is generally on the way out.

    The great irony in all of this is that M$ themselves has little respect for the IP of others and regularly violates patents, trademarks and copyrights, while simultaneously calling for fanatical protection and enforcement. Their recent loss to Actel/Lucent, and the $1,500,000,000.00 judgment highlights this. M$ themselves are more venerable to the litigation monster they helped create than free software makers who are much more careful. Ballmer has no more to offer than SCO did and I mean that in every way.

    Excuse me, while I go listen to some nice oggfiles I downloaded from archive.org. I'll keep right on partying while M$ flunks the bluff, and keeps getting dumped by customers, partners and investors alike. It's about time.

    --

    Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.

    1. Re:Good Odds. by SirTalon42 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      $1,500,000,000.00 is NOT chump change to Microsoft. Thats BILLION, not million. That will seriously hurt Microsoft's bottom line. Microsoft's profit for the last 12 months was $36.63 billion. Losing over 4% of their gross profit from a SINGLE cause would seriously hurt any company.

    2. Re:Good Odds. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      No, its operating revenue for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2004 was $36.8 billion (source). Its operating profit for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2006 was $16.5 billion (source). So basically your statement is wrong, based on a misunderstanding of finance (equating profit with revenue) and out-of-date. The good news though is your conclusion "$1.5 billion is not chump change to Microsoft" is probably accurate. And since, in my opinion, the vast majority of posts on this subject seem to draw the wrong conclusion based on false statements, your post that draws the right conclusion based on false statements deserves to be promoted. So MOD PARENT UP!!!

  10. Re:Of course he's not going to show you the code by DigitAl56K · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It is not about stealing code, but infringing patents. The real question ought to be "Show us the patents", which is more informative than "Show us the code", because even if Microsoft did show you some code, how are you supposed to know which patents were infringed by it?

  11. These guys have totally lost the plot by suckmysav · · Score: 5, Informative

    Ballmer is carrying on about "Intellectual Property" (ie patents), not copyright infringments.

    In patent cases there is no "code" to be shown because theer is no allegation that any code was in fact stolen.

    MS and their lawyers will be laughing themselves silly over the amateur hour antics of these dingbats.

    --
    "You can't fight in here, this is the war room!"
  12. IBM by Viceroy+Potatohead · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This is a joke, and will likely have the opposite effect. As others have said, if Ballmer says nothing in response, this reaction looks childish and entirely NOT reassuring. Or Ballmer could continue spreading FUD, business as usual, and ignore it -- same result. What it really needs is IBM, (not Redhat, the FSF, or Canonical), a company respected as much as MS by the top-end corporate powers-that-be, saying: "WE are not concerned with Ballmer's statements. We are entirely confident that they are baseless."