Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Sees No Conflicts With Patent Initiatives
AlexGr writes "According to Eweek's Peter Galli, Microsoft sees no contradiction between its open-source community building efforts and the more-than-thinly-veiled legal threats at Linux and other projects. Horacio Gutierrez, Microsoft's vice president of intellectual property and licensing, actually states: 'One makes the other possible, especially at a time like this, when interoperability is so important. Microsoft recognizes the importance of interoperability, which is why we are doing the things we are in our products, why we created the Interoperability Executive Customer Council, and why we are listening to customers.'"
"There IS no Conflict"
u-bend
thin veal....
Threatening us with lawsuits is part of their plan to HELP us... How did I not figure that one out... It's so obvious
"Microsoft Sees No Conflicts With Patent Initiatives"
MS is a corporation. So among other things, we know that:
(1) It doesn't actually "see" anything. It's comprised of individual humans (mostly) that see things.
(2) Because it's actually a collection of minds that don't necessarily agree with each other, it doesn't tell us much that it's engaging in two actions that are potentially un-reconcilable. When we hear that a *person* "sees no conflict", we find that interesting because we figure maybe the person has discovered some reason that they two ideas in question can be reconciled. For a corporation of multiple persons, maybe no such reconciliation of the two ideas exists.
Plus it's also quite plausible that MS management has private motives that are very different than its public motives. In that case perhaps the (inauthentic) public motives are in logical conflict, but the private motives held by MS's management are actually completely self-consistent.
Embrace, extend, extinguish! Or something. Only they're extinguishing and embracing at the same time--possibly 'extending' at the same time too, thanks to the EU. Maybe Gates' official Fürher status was like a timing signal... now they've gotten everything all mixed up.
There is only Zuel.....
-Todd
Put down the sig, and step away from the computer.
I would write another Open Letter, but at this point, I give up. They won't respond.
Brad Smith & Co: If you're listening at all, just give up the threats or sue us. Piss or get off the pot. Otherwise, maybe some open source developers might get fed up and sue YOU for slander and libel.
My blog
So they're thickly veiled threats?
General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
Of course they see no conflict. Alternatie would be that they admit that have a conflict, and then do what? There action is not a shorterm play. The reality is that MS is scared to death about the longterm of the software industry. The OSS model kills legacy applications, which is a good thing in most peoples minds. At some point, you need to stop charging for same application. Winzip comes to mind here... If OSS didnt exist, this simply would not happen.
What customers say: "This open source stuff is starting to look pretty good, and free isalot cheaper than what I'm paying now." What microsoft hears: "All this extra money and constantly updated software is confusing and scary. I wish someone would destroy these companies and maintain the status qou."
IOU one (1) signature
Lurking at the bottom of the gravity well, getting old
they never see wrongdoing on their part.
Microsoft. the reason there is braille on the keys of the drive-through ATM.
if this is supposed to be a new economy, how come they still want my old fashioned money?
TIECC - This Is an Exceedingly Clumsy Concept.
What does "Interoperability Executive Customer Council" mean? An interoperability "council" of customers' executives? An executive council of (for?!?) customers?
Try as they might, I cannot see how M$ can declare war on either side of the Patented/Open software fight. Do they really think that they can exist in both camps at once and still come out a winner?
If I'm not mistaken, the Art of War deals pretty specifically with choosing one's sides/opponents carefully.
If they wish to push for interoperability, why threaten (however thinly-veiled) the Open Source community? Particularly when they themselves are "trying" to be more open?
Big difference between "listening" and "hearing"....
Don't tell me to get a life. I'm a gamer; I have LOTS of lives!
Then any adopters of Linux ( rest of world ) will be afraid of "embracing" Microsoft, for fear of the lawyer letter in the mail.
Then Microsoft is relegated to an American-Only protocol with not a helluva lot of political clout outside the US.
This will leave businesses which have embraced the Microsoft Representative with a crippled system incapable of communicating to every customer.
Unlike open source, which will.
The businessman who shook the hand of the Microsoft rep may have to stand before the CEO and explain why he should keep his job, given the company's competitors can talk to everyone, and his company, under his signature, can only talk to a subset of the customer base.
The handshake with the Microsoft rep could be the handshake of death for many corporate CIO, as the love of universally compatible systems - and systems open to verification of their operation - become the norm.
Microsoft has now shown their hand... its got claws in it. Do you want to trust it? The smiling face of someone anticipating getting you into their cat trap could turn into a gun pretty fast if it doesn't get its way.
I don't expect the American government to do much, but I do expect compatibility with the rest of the world will do it.
When you live to face the ramifications of your selections, ignorance is NOT bliss.
"Prove all things; hold fast that which is good." [KJV: I Thessalonians 5:21]
No one should be surprised that Microsoft sees no conflict with anything that makes them money. I seriously don't mean this to be a troll but it's true.
Mr. Madison, what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.
Any time a representative of Microsoft uses the word "interoperability" in a sentence we're drawn one step closer to the abyss. Quick, everyone start chanting "Embrace and Enhance" to hold back the tide.
Company says it is working for its customers. More at 11.
Well.. maybe. Or Maybe not. But Definitely not sort of.
This seems to be a very widespread phenomenon; apparent illogic in public positions.
At even the hint of a suggestion that Microsoft has made a living from using other people's ideas, Bill Gates will immediately start into a harangue about how Microsoft is a leader because of its innovation. As most people familiar with the subject (and not predisposed to believe what Microsoft/Bill Gates says) already knows, Microsoft is not an innovator.
Many very big corporations like Microsoft, and all politicians, have learned to make statements that are based on false logic, falsified logic, and plain illogic. Big Tobacco denying the link between tobacco and cancer, Big Oil explaining their profits. I'll leave the political stuff alone because that seems to bring out the trolls.
That Microsoft will openly state that there is no tension between its 'support' of open standards and software, and their other work which supports and extends 'closed' technology is not a surprise. But what disappoints is that this rather open hypocrisy seems to be so readily accepted, especially by the mainstream media.
Have we become so jaded that truth and fact no longer matter? Am I the only one who tires of this open hypocrisy?
Best regards.
More than thinly veiled? I'd say the veil was long ago taken off completely.
There needs to be a law in economics that states that any corporation big enough, will starts to show symptoms of the corporate equivalent of Alien hand syndrome once it has crossed a specific size.
The recent mix-up at Microsoft (one hand is trying to be nice to open-source because FOSS is the current hyped buzzword of the day while at the same time the other hand is desperately trying to find a way to crush this "evil" concurrence that threatens to overthrow them from their dominant position in the market) is a perfect illustration of such dual minded corporate behaviour (for the exact reason stated above : it's made up of too many people to have a single coherent goal).
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
Microsoft. the reason there is braille on the keys of the drive-through ATM.
I would have figured it's just cheaper to make ALL keypads with braille than to manage two production lines, one with and one without...
I actually read TFA. Microsoft is cheerfully threatening the spirit of Free Software: individuals freely contributing code to a shared project.
However, Microsoft's point here is that they're happy to make patent licensing agreements (like the Novell deal) with open source software vendors. Remember, MS has stated publicly that they're happy to make the Novell deal with Red Hat, Canonical, etc.
If you're MS, and your goal is to make more Novell deals, then it makes perfect sense to make noise about your patents.
When I moderate, I only use "-1, Overrated". That way, I never get meta-moderated!
if they really wanted interoperability, then why
- are you not allowed to write a 100% openXML compatible office software based on the docs?
- is smb changed just when linux support was finally good?
- is the default filesystem changed just when linux support for ntfs got kinda working?
- do they threat to sue the wine project, just because its kinda compatible to the windows api?
liars...
The MAFIAA is a bunch of mindless jerks who will be the first up against the wall when the revolution comes
Hm. I thought it was because people sometimes walk up to them.
(IANAL)
No one will not actually trust that which lurks under the Surface.
'Tis the nature of the game. If you can win by playing it that way then it really doesn't matter to the player. Take comfort in the fact that it is not a strategy conducive to long term success; lament that short term success is always attractive enough so that tis doesn't matter.
I did. Damn those fake Sumerian gods....I should have Guugled it.
-Todd
Put down the sig, and step away from the computer.
It's quite a difficult job, but MS has been quite successful at it. They've made PR statements even less trustworthy than they used to be. And, amazingly, they've been able to keep it up for several years running. I think that they hold the undisputed title for most years in the past decade. Many years they even debase political PR.
Now, of course, this is assuming that you tar all PR with the same brush. And there may well be honest PR people out there. Sorry, but if they are offended, then they should send their complaints to the offenders.
I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
Microsoft seems to have multiple personalities. One minute they're threatening the competition, the next they're embracing standards and coming to agreements with competitors.
One thing is for sure, you'll have an easier life if you avoid relying on their software for your own commercial gains. You won't end up building solutions using their software and then ending up being a competitor to one of their solutions or infringing on their patents.
On the one hand, open source advocates embrace a business model some intend will put the for profit software model out of business, and then seem indignant when the for profit businesses attack the threat.
Ed Barbar, President and General Manager, Furnit USA
Microsoft doesn't really give a flying fuck about the license fees. Period. They are not after indemnification of your customers or to make your products inter-operable with theirs (hell, theirs aren't inter-operable with their own). What they are after is indemnification of themselves. They can only get this by first creating a problem and making their solution the only one and then by holding the feet of every other companies to the fire. After they cough up enough IP (that indemnifies them against future lawsuits from you), then they indemnify your customers. It is the IP they want, not the license fees and that IP is to protect themselves, not to open standards and create interoperability.
You can lead a man with reason but you can't make him think.
So much for energy efficient computing.
The moderator might examine the subject (sense of humor).
It has been found to be useful , even in real life circumstances.
NB: As a start to developing a sense of humour(ease into it) , you might begin by reading the works of Camus.
No you are not. Open hypocrisy is in style these days. The main stream media rarely challenges it. its disgusting really
The mainstream media protects and fosters hypocrisy. Corporate media is one of the big players creating modern politics worldwide.
You might be interested in this critique of AP's role. http://www.projectcensored.org/newsflash/ap_bias.h tml
"I've got more toys than Teruhisa Kitahara."
Microsoft used to be an evil, monopolistic company that has won big by taking advantage of their users instead of delivering value. After starting self-serving "community projects", publishing source code that only works on Windows, obtaining patent-encumbered standards, and attempting to wage a patent war on FOSS, they still are.
Hmmm.... You know in some countries telling lies about another person, or group could be construed as slander and is a suable offense. I think Microsoft should be careful in what they say. If they don't identify the patents that they are accusing the open source community is violating then the Open Source community has a good case to sue them for slander in those countries.
That Microsoft will openly state that there is no tension between its 'support' of open standards and software, and their other work which supports and extends 'closed' technology is not a surprise. But what disappoints is that this rather open hypocrisy seems to be so readily accepted, especially by the mainstream media.
It's never accepted, it's only repeated in hopes to perpetuate it. If Bill Gates can only be quoted as saying one thing, how is anyone going to show him in another light unless they resort to allegations? Using allegations makes you look like a tabloid, and reporters can't be bothered to do a whole lot of research, especially on topics that involve newfangled technology that are then mired in Microsoft's buzzword-happy marketspeak. If Microsoft is good at doing one thing, it's muddying the waters.
On the other hand, a reporter can take a facts based approach, but that requries doing your own research instead of re-printing paraphrased MS press releases. Plus, it requires educating the public on a situation they might not already know about something they probably don't care about already, so you need to convince them to go through the strain of learning something new, and then looking at it critically, systematically, and logically.
The mainstream media is mainstream because it's brain candy, not because it makes the reader work, and the mainstream media has to make money too. So you cater to the money. Which is also easy because MS hands you what to say in their marketing materials, or whenever they put up sites with complicated muddied misinformation that nobody can bother to sift through on each and every single point, and if they do, nobody bothers to read it... so that's why you still have sites around like microsoft.com/getthefacts. Can you believe that's still around, and still probably being taken seriously?
Twinstiq, game news
It makes sense that Microsoft wants to promote php, apache, and jboss on Windows. It helps their customers running Linux to switch to Windows when they threaten to sue them.
Why not switch to windows where there is no liability risk? After all you can run your same applications.
After this will be the attempt to switch former linux users into a pure Microsoft environment with all microsoft products.
http://saveie6.com/
We KNOW Microsoft never utters a word without LYING!
This is a truth on a par with "the Earth revolves around the sun."
Nothing to see here, move along.
Richard Steven Hack - This sig is TOO GODDAMN SHORT TO DO ANYTHING USEFUL WITH! MORONS!