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."
they might as well just start folding their money into paper airplanes and throw em into Redmond
You're probably just being your namesake, pair-a-noyd. By the way, I just noticed a new package is available in my stable-supported channel: ms-bsod-import. I wonder what that means?
Appended to the end of comments you post. 120 chars.
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?
When Microsoft came for Novel,
I remained silent;
I did not use OpenSUSE.
When they locked Xandros into a deal,
I remained silent;
I did not use their software either.
When they came for LG Electronics,
I did not speak out;
As I did not think it meant anything.
And finally when the suits came for Ubuntu,
there was no one left to speak out.
Embrace, Extend, Destroy.
What on Earth are you doing on Slashdot?
After all, how many billion dollars did MS spend to make Windows XP and Vista the best operating systems this universe has ever seen? And some people thought they could just go and steal everything without having Microsoft fight back?
235 patents.
I say again: 235 patents.
Considering how rock solid Windows has been since Windows 2000, and that Linux is still a little flaky, I'm guessing the kernel developers didn't have access to the stability patents by Microsoft.
Well, I'm really only surprised that LG didnt just license Windows instead and be rid of all the issues at once.
Linux violates 235 Microsoft patents.
go read the deals themselves. Ignore the headlines and read the friggin deals.
Novel pays MSFT $100 odd million. MSFT pays novel $240 million.
Novell nets $140 million dollars, and MSFT literally spews FUD, when MSFT did the paying.
Xandros and LG are just cashing in on the deal. Not for Linux's sake but for free money from MSFT.
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.
Anti-trust.
MS is pressuring people to sign these agreements under the veil that they could get sued by Microsoft -- even though none of their claims have been released or validated.
Snidely imply that Linux violates your patents, get people to sign up and cross license their patents with you, then use that as further pressure to get other people to sign up for licensing agreements. These companies didn't go to MS and say "hey, we'd like to do that" -- I bet thy got told that if they *didn't*, then they could be subject to legal action.
Illegally using your market dominance to unfairly compete -- too bad the USDOJ lost their balls to actually do anything. Notice, they still haven't complied with the EUs requirements.
Basically, they're just thumbing their nose at people who are pointing out what they are doing is supposed to be illegal.
Cheers
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
Linspire: Oh, they're coming! They're coming! Just like last time!
Debian: We've got to wait it out for reinforments.
Linspire: They killed Private Xandros and Assimilated General SUSE! We've next!
BOOOOOOOOM!
Debian: LG Electronics!
Linspire: They're gone...
Red Hat: (removes his hat)
Ubuntu: (plays a funeral tune on his bugle)
Oops. Here, let me fix that for you:
There. That's better.
My blog
That's right people MSFT is paying protection money to Linux vendors...
Your statement is very clever, but untrue.
Yes, microsoft is paying linux vendors. But history has shown that Microsoft has an end-game in mind that will harm everyone.
Got Trader Joe's? friendwich.com RSS feeds work now!
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.
If you have paid for the right to use a patent then you cannot possibly infringe by definition.
Microsoft is buying rights to other people's patents because it makes a huge amount of stuff and there is a significant probability that they would otherwise infringe.
Other people want access to Microsoft because there is a significant chance that the stuff they build on top of Linux might infringe even if Linux does not.
Microsoft has a metric crapload of patents. The chance that Linux does not infringe at all is rather small. The real issue there is not infringement but what attempts they will or can make to enforce.
I don't think that the regulatory regime is going to be such that Microsoft can safely engage in SCO style tactics even if they wanted to.
Looking for an Information Security student project suggestion?
Try http://dotcrimeManifesto.com/