Slashdot Mirror
Novell Goes Public with Microsoft Linux Deal
InfoWorldMike writes "On the back of defending the agreement this week, Novell did as promised and published details of its landmark November 2006 Linux partnership agreements with Microsoft. Linux advocates are expected to scour the documents for signs of how the agreement may affect Linux and whether anything in it will put Microsoft or Novell in potential violation of the upcoming version 3 of the GNU General Public license (GPL). The GPL is used in licensing many components of the Linux operating system. Open-source advocate Bruce Perens said he would be looking to see exactly what Novell was given through the deal and whether there is any requirement for the Linux vendor to defend Microsoft's patent claims. 'What I'm actually looking for is, to what extent was there a violation of faith?' he said."
Link to actual agreement
I am no lawyer (but I do read contracts from time to time, as a 'hobby'), but this is really an odd 'covenant'. The agreement appears to not state what products are actually covered by the patent covenant, in bizarre ways. For example, "Clone Products" are not covered, "Clone Products" being presumably things like Mono and OpenOffice (as they duplicate Microsoft APIs and products); yet all such products already designed at time of signing are exempt, i.e., they are covered. Yet, the following projects are not subject to the exemption: "Wine, OpenXchange, StarOffice and OpenOffice", i.e., they are not covered. So OpenOffice appears to not be covered.
Likewise Samba would presumably be a "Clone Product", and not covered as well, except by the exemption due to its existing at time of signing. Yet this might not cover additional functionality added later. It just isn't clear.
No actual products are named aside from the quote above, and even they are not stated as being covered or not (just not exempted by a particular subsection). So, reading this, I can't tell whether Novell customers are in fact covered or not, in any way. The assumption was always that the agreement did protect them from patent lawsuits. But that assumption may have been wrong.
Is the contract specifically designed to not mention any products, effectively letting it be ambiguous and perhaps of no legal use - that is, only effective for PR purposes?
Poop, kripkenstein found the link so if mods could be so kind as to mod my parent comment down so that the useful stuff can float to the top, thanks!
Mr. Universe: "They can't stop the signal, Mal. They can never stop the signal."
Whether people like it or not, whether the deal goes on as planned or not, or whether this in any way violates GPL, the damage is unfortunately already done - and not necessarily because of any effects that may come out of the agreement. The real damage is that the very thought this agreement will cause Stallman to pretty much COMPLETELY lose it, in the flying-blind-in-the-land-of-batshit kind of way. I can't imagine his behavior will get more reasonable anyway, and with his credibility already stretched and the tensions already rife within the community, it doesn't bode well. Open infighting amongst the FOSS community is just what we need right now......
No your not the only whose skeptical about religion here. But "faith" as it is used here is a legal term.
Does this sig remind you of Agatha Christie?
Am I the only one on slashdot with such a limited vocabulary?
There, fixed that for you.
Sadly, the answer is probably no.
Gnome - KDE
MS - Linux
Its time to put an end to these childish rivalries and Machiavellian plots. I think a good start would be for Dice-K to go over and personally meet each of the Yankees TODAY, and tell them how much he appreciates their skills and looks forward to seeing them in June at Fenway.
The GPL is used in licensing many components of the Linux operating system.
Finally a summary that contains a very much needed and comprehensive definition of the GPL. That's something every geek's been dreaming about since Slashdot was born!
You know, companies are mostly free to make deals with other companies provided no laws are broken.
Microsoft is free to use GPL'd code, provided they follow those (GPL, LGPL) agreements.
OTOH, if **any** company doesn't follow the agreement - GET THEM!
Too many of them - http://gpl-violations.org/
Linksys being the most famous: http://lwn.net/Articles/51570/
Personally, I'd love to see Microsoft found guilty of violating the GPL/LGPL, but I know how hard they work to ensure that doesn't happen - at least a few years ago they worked really hard.
OTOH, OSS developers should also respect when a company decides they don't wish to be part of any OSS-based licensing. Personally, I avoid doing business with those companies, unless absolutely necessary and I keep the amount of business to the minimum possible.
...Novell and Microsoft agree to provide a combined offering consisting of SLES and a subscription for SLES support with Microsoft Windows Server, Microsoft Virtual Server and Microsoft Viridian. It looks like Microsoft has given up and just started naming their products appropriately....and that's the way the cookie crumbles.
Microsoft hereby covenants not to assert Microsoft Patents against each Non-Compensated Individual Hobbyist Developer (also referred to as "You") for Your personal creation of an originally authored work ("Original Work") and personal use of Your Original Work. This pledge is personal to You and does not apply to the use of Your Original Work by others or to the distribution of Your Original Work by You or others. A "Non-Compensated Individual Hobbyist Developer" is an individual software developer (i.e., a person and not any corporation, partnership or other legal entity), including a developer of open source software, who receives no monetary payment or any other forms of consideration that can be valued monetarily for their creation of their Original Works. The fact that You may be employed as a software developer by, and receive a salary from, a corporation, partnership or other legal entity, does not disqualify You from treatment as a "Non-Compensated Individual Hobbyist Developer" under this pledge, provided Your activities related to the creation of Your Original Work are performed during Your free time and outside the scope of Your employment. The Microsoft Patents subject to this pledge are all patents issued world-wide to the extent they are owned or controlled by Microsoft or its majority owned subsidiaries. For additional information on obtaining rights under Microsoft patents to contribute Your Original Work to an open source project, please see Microsoft's Patent Pledge for Hobbyist Contributors. WTF is that? This is meaningless drivel. The whole point of free software is freedom to work on it community. If all I do is mod code at home and use it at home it ain't open and I'm not free. This also puts a big cloud over free software use commercially, ie. when i participate in and/or lead free software projects are part of my day job...which is a big component of this. Free software is a treasure trove of problem solutions. They are effectively saying you can work on or use that software without paying M$.
I like Suse. I've used it for years. I use OpenSuse and hope it will keep itself clear of that but I'm looking for alternatives. Ubuntu has a chance but anything that puts GNOME first is crap. I don't like Mono or the rest of Miguel's M$ fan-boyism. I don't want M$ crap in my life and haven't had it there for years.
Its just a matter of time... but this is hardly news at this point.
Sure hope none of them catch that stomach flu that he has.
From reading the comments and the snippets in the comments it sounds like it's another damned unintelligible EULA. One of the main reasons I prefer GNU/Linux is their EULA (it may have the GPL and others but in those I can find sites that fully explain it in a common language as well as gives me some tangible rights as well as restrictions.)
"Enjoy what you're doing! If it becomes drudgery, you're doing it wrong!" - Jim Butterfield
It's worth noting 3.4:
3.4 No Acknowledgement of Infringement. Nothing in this Agreement shall imply, or be construed as an admission or acknowledgement by a Party, that any Patents of the other Party are infringed, valid or enforceable.
Which will hopefully finally put an end to all the nonsense conspiracy theories that "Novell admitted that Linux infringes patents" etc., even though Novell have constantly re-iterated that such a claim was ridiculous. As I've said several times before, blaming Novell for Microsoft's recent claims is just completely unfounded, and in fact there's nothing new or particularly recent about it; Microsoft have always been flooding the market with falsities about Linux's infringement on their patents.
Hopefully the published results will provide the community with a general better understanding of the deal, so that at least if they disagree/hate it, they do it for real reasons (which seems to be rare).
I like Suse. I've used it for years. I use OpenSuse and hope it will keep itself clear of that but I'm looking for alternatives. Ubuntu has a chance but anything that puts GNOME first is crap. I don't like Mono or the rest of Miguel's M$ fan-boyism. I don't want M$ crap in my life and haven't had it there for years.
Once you set it Debian, it's awesome. It doesn't do everything for you so you will also have the opportunity to learn. Yeh!
I wrote here at the time that the point of a secret covenant was for the companies to be able to sell the same peace more than once.
PHBs need to understand they can't buy peace -- Not ever. They have to take it by choosing to be Free and Open.
Novell's contributions to the OIN need to be reassessed now because the value of the patents they contributed may have been wiped out by this agreement. How many other OIN partners have worked a deal like this or outright licensed away their patents? Is the Open Invention Network a complete sham?
Novell took money from Microsoft. Microsoft always gets something valuable in return. I continue to believe the "something of value" was a pledge for Novell programmers to leverage MS IP in their products so that when this deal expired their customers would be hooked into paying MS licensing fees for products that run in Linux. It's the only way Microsoft encouraging deployment of Linux makes sense from a Microsoft point of view.
It certainly will be easier to do with Novell offshoring most of their development. High profile evacuations in their onshore development teams show an important trend. The FOSS developers who create great work because they have both skill and a passion for the "free as in liberty" aspect of open source software have fled. Offshore they can hire coders who are interested in personal liberty from the oppressed economic conditions of their community and are less concerned with the Freedom of others who fare better than them at a minimum. It's not a formula for good code. Passion adds considerable quality to the output - perhaps quality that cannot be had any other way. A software system is not a microwave oven.
Novell desperately needed that money from Microsoft because delays in their financial reporting caused by an audit of options grants allowed their major creditor to call loans that would have seriously impacted their operation. Somebody needs to have a close look at how this squeeze play was engineered. Its timing is suspicious in the extreme. It would not surprise me if both the investigation that triggered the audits and the creditor were both suspiciously motivated. All FOSS companies need to have a close look at their exposure to being leveraged in this way.
It is my hope and belief that Novell regrets their dance with the devil and they're trying to escape his fee. We will see if they can do it. In any case it should be more clear to all that dancing with the devil is a dangerous game.
Help stamp out iliturcy.
The real damage is that the very thought this agreement will cause Stallman to pretty much COMPLETELY lose it, in the flying-blind-in-the-land-of-batshit kind of way. I can't imagine his behavior will get more reasonable anyway,
Actually, this agreement shows that Stallman's behavior is completely reasonable. It's you who is "batshit" because you still just don't get the kinds of dirty tricks companies like Microsoft are trying.
with his credibility already stretched and the tensions already rife within the community, it doesn't bode well. Open infighting amongst the FOSS community is just what we need right now......
There is no "infighting", and fairly little disagreement in the FOSS communities. Mostly, it's just laissez faire. Compare that to the kind of cut-throat competition and dirty tricks going on in the commercial world, where companies not only screw each other but also screw the customer.
Even if you look at individuals, Stallman and Linux may be abrasive, but they are far more sensible, rational, and smart individuals than Ballmer or other commercial industry leaders.
The damage is done
The only "damage" from this is to Microsoft's reputation: Ballmer has shown that he is impotent: he can't stop open source. He can't name any patents, and he can't even get Novell to license their patents without paying Novell hundreds of millions of dollars. And their attempts at getting agreements through FUD are being undermined by license changes within a few months.
The last few months have shown only one thing: Microsoft's technology is worse than open source, their patents are worthless, and their dirty tricks aren't working either. Yes, there's big damage, and it's to Microsoft's reputation.
In the new dawn emerging from the FOSS revolution we are finally getting what we really need to move technology forward: light. These back room deals for contingent permission to use intangible ideas and leverage market share will not stand the light of day. All deals are eventually exposed. This leads to some business ethics lessons that should have been the standard all along:
Now let us set out to innovate good products and sell them on their merits, m'k?
Help stamp out iliturcy.
If it was it would have had a much better IDE and GUI that resembles Visual Studio.
Did you know that C#, Visual BASIC.Net, etc Microsoft gave the EMCA the rights to allow the standards for those languages to be given out to open source software?
Not only is there Mono, but also DotGNU that does a version of those languages.
They are not clones, but they are trying to make the languages available for multiple platforms. They also make Dotnet available for multiple platforms, because C# and Visual BASIC.net use Dotnet as part of their standard framework.
The reasons why they aren't clones is because you cannot take Visual Studio code and compile it on Mono and DotGNU unless you modify the code and tweak it. That is because Mono and DotGNU are written from scratch and not actual ports of Visual Studio.
OpenOffice.Org is not a clone of MS-Office either. It was written from scratch. The only thing it has in common with MS-Office is the MS-Office format files it can save as and read, and possible some primitive VBA support.
Mono and DotGNU are open source "alternatives" to Visual Studio, not clones.
OpenOffice.Org is an open source "alternative" to MS-Office.
Linux is an open source "alternative" to MS-Windows.
Tux is an open source "alternative" to Mickey Mouse.
Linus Torvalds is an open source "alternative" to Bill Gates
None of them are clones of the other.
Remember, Slashdot does not have a -1 disagree moderation, and no, troll, flamebait, and overrated are not substitutes.
gnewsense is based on ubuntu and uses no non-free software and sports KDE. great platform for those who dont want to feed the machine. you would make stallman proud.
"You can kill the revolutionary, but you can't kill the revolution."-- Fred Hampton
SCO shipped Xenix compatibility crap with OpenServer, as required by the contract that transferred Xenix to SCO. SCO didn't actually want to ship this crap, as least for the price being paid. BTW, Microsoft also had shares of SCO from that deal.
SCO got their freedom in a lawsuit a few years back. As I recall, there was a settlement. Microsoft sold/lost the shares and SCO stopped shipping the Xenix crap.
Why not acknowledge a real reason then, namely, that the patent agreement "innovated" a way to turn free software into effectively nonfree software? Moreover, it tries to do this by subverting the most widespread free software license. So serious is this problem that it forced the GPL3 to be delayed just in order to have language to ban this practice. No amount of excuses from Novell or FAQs can fix this problem.
If that is not enough reason for any free software person to shun Novell, then I don't know what is.
...all this is really a distraction from dealing with the core issue of the fraudulent perspective of the patenting software.
See: http://threeseas.net/abstraction_physics.html re: what is universally considered NOT patentable.
> Which will hopefully finally put an end to all the nonsense conspiracy theories that "Novell admitted that Linux infringes patents" etc., even though Novell have constantly re-iterated that such a claim was ridiculous.
I wouldn't call that a "conspiracy theory" because it was Microsoft who perpetuated that claim. Yes, they went to the media and used it to whip up all this FUD, like the 235 patents bit. And with the rest of us unable to read the agreement...
Anyhow, I figured that was just Microsoft stabbing their "partners" in the back. Hopefully, that will teach Novell not to deal with them again, it's been nothing but trouble for them and I don't think they intended anything bad--they probably just wanted to protect their customers--but they chose a really bad way to do that.
>If it weren't for RMS, Moglen, the FSF, and now the Software Freedom Law Center, all you "open-source" folks would be working for Microsoft or some other proprietary software developer.
There are plenty of evil proprietary software companies inserting evil code into open source projects.
Its going to freak us all out eventually until our brains explode like in 'the scanners'.
http://lwn.net/Articles/222773/
Top lines changed by employer
(Unknown) 66154 19.0%
Red Hat 44527 12.8%
(None) 38099 11.0%
IBM 25244 7.3%
Astaro 15306 4.4%
Linux Foundation 13638 3.9%
Qumranet 12108 3.5%
Novell 11930 3.4%
Intel 11652 3.4%
SANPeople 9888 2.8%
NetXen 9607 2.8%
Sony 8497 2.4%
Broadcom 8349 2.4%
Tensilica 8195 2.4%
Nokia 5581 1.6%
MontaVista 4394 1.3%
University of Aberdeen 4324 1.2%
LWN.net 3975 1.1%
Secretlab 3370 1.0%
HP 3211 0.9%
Partnership? Toady, more like it.
Did as promised? Spin doctoring, more like it.
Partnership agreements? Pact, more like it.
Have you got your LWN subscription yet?
Another conspiracy theory he can use to attack Novell since the "Novell is trying to be bought out by Microsoft" one was so ridiculous it just made him look like an idiot.
/. and Linux Today.
Naturally in any legal document you can spin the thing any way you want - despite or perhaps because of the supposedly rigorous legal language - so I'm sure he'll come up with something to let him get more play in
Richard Steven Hack - This sig is TOO GODDAMN SHORT TO DO ANYTHING USEFUL WITH! MORONS!
When Roger Clemens joins the Yankees, I fully expect he will show some of the Red Sox how much he respects the rivalry between the two teams and how he appreciates some of his old mates.
That appreciation will be expressed from a distance of 60 feet, 6 inches.
"not to assert Microsoft's patents against those customers for the customers use of products and services of Novell for which Novell receives revenue. "
So where does free software fall in this statement. Does Novell receive revenue for all the FLOSS it distributes? Sounds like BOHICA time to me.
boycott slashdot February 10th - 17th check out: altSlashdot.org
Peace is not about whether people argue or not.
Peace is about whether you can go about your business without expecting to have to accept being raped (pillaged or murdered) _and_ _like_ _it_.
It's the last part that is the deadliest to the human spirit, that the aggressor demands that you must _enjoy_ his (or her) attentions. (It's bad enough not being allowed to fight back, but then they insist that you _must_ be enjoying it.)
Or, if you insist that peace is the lack of argument, I will qote The Revelation about being "oppressed by peace".
joudanzuki
Passion can be scary -- anyone who's stood at an altar to be married can tell you that. Passion is a powerful motivator for a lot of things, including innovative problem solving. Yes, passionate people who care about their work can engage in strident discussion. Should it rise to the necessary level, alliances will form and there will be yet another fork. Customers, especially business customers, need not be afraid of this process - X.org teaches us that often a fork brings clarity and cohesion to a passionate team and outstanding results are almost immediately forthcoming.
Disagreements in the secret back room deals process, however, are something businessmen need to fear. They can lead to warring law firms, legal liabilities, and injunctions against almost any non-open technology that a company has leveraged to compete effectively. This can bring multinational firms to a halt, prevent essential communications for emergency personnel, or completely break a supply chain overnight. These are not minor risk at all. These are bet-the-company risks. Every business school teaches the same mantra: "risk is essential to good business. Embrace risk. But do not bet the company."
To bring this back on topic, there is a course of action Novell can pursue that will eventually bring them absolution. Microsoft demonstrated this technique in their deal with Sendo. Basically their deal involved providing the OS for the Sendo phone. If the product failed to launch by a set date for any reason, including Microsoft's inability to deliver the OS, the terms of the deal resulted in Microsoft ownership of all of Sendo's phone related IP. Unsurprisingly, Sendo is no more. Also unsurprisingly, other phone vendors are reluctant to reap the benefits of partnering with the PC software market leader.
Novell can deliver the goods - developing C# and Mono, Visual Basic for Open Office for the Linux platform. They can leverage the economics of overseas labor markets to hire an army of paralegals to document in the source code specifically by number (or more subtly with easily searchable keywords) which patents are violated. They can identify leaky workers and assign them to positions of responsibility, identifying them anonymously to L'inq. They can make the project their organizational strategy lab and send a new manager (or better yet, a failed engineer) to reorganize it every 90 days. They can hire Scott Adams as a motivational speaker. Site security can be overseen by the cousin of the accountant that does the inventory, who is the Aunt of the payroll accountant who is the cousin of the head of HR who seems not to notice that the majority of employees exist only in the payroll. This is the customary practice in Banaglore anyway - everybody is related to everybody else and if you can't indulge in a little nepotism how important could you be? Since failure is not only the expected, but the desired outcome, the place can be a plush corporate retreat where junkets by excecutives can be organized for minimal oversight and maximum recreation where it is understood that inspection tours will only be a strictly scheduled and carefully guided interlude between morning golf and discussion with open bar. They can dogfood the heck out of the thing, insisting that pre-alpha tools be used for management, production and accounting. When their committed investment is gone, they can appeal for more cash (bleed the beast!) or just shrug and say it's not their fault - offshoring wasn't guaranteed and it just didn't work - but see what strides
Help stamp out iliturcy.
You fail it.
Is this good news or bad news? I can not say for sure as when I read the contract I am not sure what I am really reading. All I can say is that Micrsoft has done illegal or used legal loopholes to gain a strangle hold on the computer industry, who is to say it will not happen again. I for one will have to be on the side that says they are trying to screw over Linux and I can say I do not like that one bit.
"Health nuts are going to feel stupid someday, lying in hospitals dying of nothing." - Redd Foxx
7.2 ***. If a *** (or ***e.g., an *** or ***) *** that this Agreement or the *** (including *** or with respect thereto) of *** under this Agreement are not *** to which a *** and there is an *** by a *** with respect to such *** that the *** and there is no *** (e.g. through amendment of this Agreement), then such *** may*** of the *** this Agreement by *** to the ***.
-------
Does anyone remember this? I think it was written sometime in 2000, but since then, things like graphical RPM managment have started to appear in various Linux distros.
I've been watching RMS and Bruce Perens for more than 20 years. I don't always agree with them, though they have contributed far more to the cause than I. RMS in particular can get carried away with enthusiasm.
Having considered the issues myself however, it is my belief that they had considered these issues with what I would consider mathematical rigor long before I was even interested in them. You could see that I sometimes disagree with them about important issues if you were a contributor here, since it's in slashdot's record. I must confess however that where I've felt they were wrong over the years subsequent events have proven them right more often than not.
I perceive that the problem you have with them is a problem they have that I share. They are not good at suffering fools.
Help stamp out iliturcy.
Hold on. I was with you until this point. A _mouthpiece_ for Stallman? I am sure this would be news to him. Can you name this person or is this just as nonsensical as the rest of your post?
Anyone who has not seen the following link on what Novell's partner Microsoft inspires should see:
http://www.inlumineconsulting.com:8080/website/ms
Of course, there's an entire system of astroturfing, shilling, and even some trolling generated by the enormous vested interest in nonfree software.
I listen to rms interviews and talks all the time. He's an *excellent communicator. He doesn't bullshit, he doesn't dangle vague terms around and speculate about this and that. He insists on precise words with actual meanings (e.g. "Linux" for the kernel, GNU/Linux for systems that use the kernel and the GNU applications).
My theory is that most people who think he is overly radical, that he "starts throwing his toys out of the pram because someone said "Linux" instead of "GNU/Linux" get their info from the press, which operates by taking the most inflammatory or sensational bits out of an interview and quoting that.
My turnips listen for the soft cry of your love
Roger should have an easy time at Fenway. Massachusetts has laws against abuse of the elderly.
Note that if you add up the money transfer, then MS actually paid Novell M$40. I think that the 'covenant' protects MS against being sued by Novell, not the other way around.
Excuse me, but please get off my Pennisetum Clandestinum, eh!
Neither of them have control on people.
In many Catholic countries people turn a blind eye to the "teachings of the church" and use contraception and have abortions.
Just in Mexico City there are around 8000 abortions every year, it being a very Catholic country.
In Spain gay marriage was legalized last year, another country not being fazed by Mr Benedict the Pope.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
There is nothing wrong with expressing different ideas and airing them.
But your position is quite stalinist (or chose your dictator here, be free to do so, at least other people respect your right to express yourself).
Stallman is a very important voiced that needs to be heard, if anything he has been consistent and is inmovable principles have allowed software for all to thrive.
This would have been impossible with BSD licensing, where everybody would have run away with the goodies of others and then would have sued any other people trying to use the same source code.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
What you were told is that you are an ungrateful bastard, good manners demand that at the very least you would treat the man with some respect since you are benefitting from his work.
Nobody demanded that you stop using computers, the other poster suggested that you stop being such an hypocrate by moudbathing the hand that has fed your software needs. That is not totalitarianism, that is common sense and requesting basic good manners.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
Or trolling.
Or both.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
Mods, wakey, wakey.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
A magistral performance. Honestly, well done.
You took us for the ride. I fell for it initially.
Pat yourself in the back, wonderful performance.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
I honestly want to know.
They agreed not to sue the pants of each other, but Novell knew there was nothing to be sued for. So actually that would imply they took advantage of MS weak position, and all this using as a tool software that they only distribute and for which they have no moral standing to use in such manner.
We can spin it in many different ways, the one above amuses me the most, the reality is that no matter what, Novell come in no way looking good.
We knew who MS are. We learned who Novell is. Novell will have to work real hard to re-gain any trust they so easily squandered.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
Such a deal clearly makes Novell appear as "the clean Linux" while any other distributors are smeared as "those patents thiefs".
Basically they are abrogating for themselves a role that nobody bestowed into them with the work of the whole community.
I have no idea if the contrived contracts both companies signed allow for this to be done legally (there have been noises from people better informed than myself abot the deal actually contravening the GPL from both sides of this disgraceful agreement) but I am as sure as hell that this "deal" is a slap in the face to all the people contributing to Linux that do not work for Novell and to any Linux users that do not buy Novell's LInux offerings.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.