Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft and LG Electronics Sign Linux Covenant
rs232 wrote with a PC World link discussing another alliance between Microsoft and a vendor via Linux. The vendor this time around is electronics maker LG, and marks the fifth company to license unspecified patents relating to Linux or Linux devices from the OS giant. "'This agreement is focused only on exchange of patent rights,' said David Kaefer, general manager of IP licensing at Microsoft. 'The open-source elements of the deal do utilize a covenant model similar to the Xandros and Novell deals, but this deal is most similar to recent agreements with Samsung and Fuji Xerox.' Those deals were signed this year in April and March, respectively. Both covered general access to intellectual property contained in patent portfolios and included protection for customers using Linux-based software."
Why do I keep seeing headlines about companies signing patent deals with a company who said that Linux infringes on exactly 225 of their patents, but doesn't know which ones? Why are companies signing patent deals with a company to protect them from patents without knowing what they are? This is sounding like SCO -vs- IBM 2.0, but even more bizarre. What the heck is going on?
apparently you like everyone else isn't reading the deals properly.
When all is said and done MSFT is PAYING Novell 140 million dollars.
That's right people MSFT is paying protection money to Linux vendors, while telling the press the exact opposite.
read the facts for yourself. not MSFT PR spin only.
i thought once I was found, but it was only a dream.
Both companies are simply saying we could sue each other but we won't.
Before I get my qwerty in a knot over this, am I not correct in pointing out these covenants and agreements apply only to companies who deal with the U.S.A., while doing business in said state?
Last time I checked, I live elsewhere, my current distro is E.U. based, and my probable future distro is based in the Isle of Man, so why should I care about Americans shooting themselves in the foot?
In B.C., our fascism is green.
does that mean that MS is telling LG what patents they claim they own in linux?
Perhaps all these deals are to give an aura of legitimacy to their patent claims, enabling them to spread FUD more effectively.
Perhaps they want to get enough people to continue Linux support under GPLv2.
Perhaps it's an attempt to tie Linux to some actual companies, which they can later undercut and drive out of business (which is how they've dealt with their traditional competitors until now, but which hasn't worked against open source.)
Honestly, I haven't been able to figure out what this is about.
It's not wasting time, I'm educating myself.
I would like to remind people that if Microsoft ever tries to enforce any patents Linux violates, they will have to deal with a huge, somewhat concerted effort to invalidate as many Microsoft patents as possible. Imagine what a couple hundred dedicated and knowledgeable geeks can dig in terms of prior art. While the geeks may not be a significant nuisance for Microsoft, anyone who has cross-licensing agreements will consider those patents they paid for that are now invalid as a reason to re-negotiate the deal with MS. In this scenario, while Microsoft may not bleed to death from the patent invalidation suits, they will find themselves in a much weaker position regarding their patent licensing partners than they find themselves now.
BTW, how much does it cost to fight a patent invalidation suit when you have some clear prior art? Is it possible to ask the USPTO (we are almost always talking US software-related patents) to re-examine a patent in light of some newly found prior art?
http://www.dieblinkenlights.com