Slashdot Mirror
Xandros CEO Doesn�t Agree Linux is Patent Violator
whitehartstag writes with a link to a Network World article about statements from Xandros in the wake of their Microsoft deal. Xandros CEO Andreas Typaldos made a point of stating that they don't believe their product violates any of Microsoft's patents. Nor, he said, did the software giant share with them exactly which patents they believe Linux violates. Just the same, he's disappointed with the reaction they've received from the open source community. "Feedback from the Linux community has been on the order of 'you shouldn't really be talking to the devil.' Linux and open-source advocates believe it is a big issue and say the Xandros deal, and another signed by Novell with Microsoft last year, erodes open source licensing provisions especially around intellectual property issues. Indeed, the Free Software Foundation is rewriting its GNU General Public License (GPL) 3.0 to prohibit such patent deals in the future."
Future submitters, just keep this text on hand the next time some idiot signs a deal with Microshaft:
It's almost beyond belief that these guys keep giving the community a great big "FUCK YOU", and yet are always surprised when we don't welcome them as liberators, with flowers and open wallets.
you had me at #!
Until Microsoft actually reveals the patents that are being "violated" it really can't be judged what patents (if any) do and don't violate Microsoft patents. Until this happens, all we are being fed is hearsay and speculation.
Well, back to rejecting software patent applications.
FTFA: The customer in the market place is dictating what we are doing, not my engineers
You are using a tremendous amount of software your engineers didn't write. I'd say that inevitably, the authors of that software will dictate what you are doing. You and the customers are just enjoying the ride with their permission. Try to remember that the next time you throw dirt in their eyes--assuming you get that chance.
From TFA:
"We did not discuss patents [with Microsoft] and we don't think Linux violates any patents and we were not asked about it," Typaldos said. "It is a non-issue for us."
...then...
"Linux says it does not infringe on patents, Microsoft say otherwise. But customers say let me buy some insurance because if there are any flying sparks I don't want to be caught in the middle of that."
Typaldos says that was the genesis of Monday's deal with Microsoft that covered interoperability and IP licensing and included "covenants" to protect customers using Xandros software from any potential patent-infringement claims from Microsoft.
If Microsoft is running around shrieking about patents, and if your customers are demanding you do something because they are feeling vulnerable about patents, and then you strike a deal on that very issue - but don't talk about patents, then you don't know what the hell you're doing.
This chicanery hasn't yet hit a distro that I use, but it's a trend that really should stop.
Running Windows^H^H^H^H^H^H^H OSX and Linux in the home. (I don't have time for Solitaire any more.)
So, in effect, Xandros is making a deal that puts their 'community' above the community at large, whereas I would argue that the intent of the GPL in general, and the open-source developers that use it, is to create something that the wider community (all developers, all users, including Xandros and their customers) will ultimately benefit from.
I think that as long as companies like Novell and Xandros keep thinking of the community of only being made up of their paying customers, they are missing the point of free software and ultimately will be missing out on the crucial developments that they require to maintain profitability.
...the signal they are sending to customers and (worse yet) potential customers is what matters...
...and that signal is: "Yes we do belive Linux is violating Microsoft's patents."
Do not sign those deals, Microsoft will kill you wheather you sign or not and you are giving them more ammo to kill you with.
Anything that suggests Microsoft is doing something good is immediately shot down.
I fail to see how "pay us and we won't crush you" qualifies as 'doing something good.'
By that metric, the Mafia must be the best guys ever! All they want is your money, and they'll be ever so nice to you.
"Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
How so? If I buy car insurance, I know what risks I am covering: collision, uninsured drivers, etc. If I buy house insurance, I know what risks I am covering: fire, flood, etc. If I buy "Microsoft insurance for Linux", what risks am I covering? Citing "un-specified patent violations" is not good enough, you cannot buy insurance for "unspecified threats", unless it is the mob coming by to compliment you on your car or house and how shameful it would be if something bad happened to it. Last I checked, this kind of extortion was illegal. How is what Microsoft is doing ANY different than extortion?
The target that you should be aiming for regarding these patent agreements is not Xandros, or Novell, or even Microsoft. It should be the borked Software Patent laws that you've got in the US. Fix those, and you'll have no need of any patent agreemetns, or any patent clauses in the GPLv3.
/Novell, then you might actually achieve something.
So, where are the details of the letters you're all sending to your Senators / Congress-people? (You ARE sending them aren't you???) Where is the campaign to change the law? If you lot spent half the time trying to amend legislation that you do bitching about Xandros
(I can't do anything, as where I'm from we don't have software patents. Software clauses in the GPLv3, or patent agreements between Xandros / Novell and Microsoft mean nothing to me, as they are irrelevant. However, seeing various parts of the Linux community slag into each other because of the uncertainty caused by a borked patent system pisses me off royally - FIX YOUR PATENT SYSTEM!!!)
Sesostris III
You never know what is enough unless you know what is more than enough. - Blake
And you have the list of these patents that are contained in GNU/Linux so that we can remove said code.
Or baring that do you have the Microsoft source codes so that we can look them over and find the infrigments ourselves.
I thought not.
Undetectable Steganography? Yep, there's an app fo
Just the opposite.
Msft wants the public to believe that *only* novell and xandros can be used without fear. Where does that leave redhat, which has about 75% of the enterprise market? Or Debian, or Ubuntu, or Mandrake, or Slackware?
The very fact that these deals are made makes Linux look dirtry - which is of course the idea. These companies take msft fud money to help msft imply that linux is a legal mine-field.
"They're eliminating the fear that if their product is used, they, the customer, won't have to worry about the big bad MS coming after them."
No, they're trying to create fear that Linux contains their IP. They want to eliminate all free as in beer versions of Linux. This is just step two of their plan. The SCO litigation was step one.
The race isn't always to the swift... but that's the way to bet!
Yeah I agree. These guys don't see the damage that they are doing by signing such a deal. They are giving Microsoft legitimacy to bully people in the community. The companies of Xandros, Novell and LG will never be free of Microsoft who provides them with no benefit when it comes to the Linux Community if they keep doing this. I guess they don't realize that what the community is fighting for is ultimately better for them then what Microsoft is offering.
The reality is that software patents are bad for the Software industry as a whole. It will be the undoing of the industry creating a situation that even Microsoft won't be able to afford to operate in. What benefit will they have when they have to pay company X for one patent and then company Y for another patent and company Z for another patent and company Q for another patent. Its a situation that will bring even Microsoft down. I wouldn't be surprised if Windows already violates thousands of patents today while they are professing their fictitious patents against Linux. The way the US Patent office has been filing such patents has probably already created such a situation. Pretty soon the only places where people will be able to innovate is places like Canada where Software patents are not recognized by the Legal System.
That's what insurance is.
The difference between insurance and protection money is that the insurance company isn't threatening to burn down your store.
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
It's not quite that simple. What Microsoft is doing is establishing a base of transactions for the underlying concepts used in FOSS projects, so they can take the projects from the community.
The free software community works on a non-transactional basis. There's an expectation of delayed gratification from many contributors. For example, I write tools for my field, but I'm a poor coder. I taught myself programming out of desperation, because there were so few suitable programs available. Because I release those tools under the GPL, I have an expectation that they will be improved by coders with greater skills (but less knowledge of my niche field), and the improvements will be available to me. That's the strength of the GPL, if it weren't for the copyleft provision, unscrupulous developers could simply take my code and commercialise it, and I'd see no benefit from my work.
This works with software like no other product because with software, there's no cost of duplication, and the cost of developing the tool for myself is a sunk cost. Releasing it to the community is no additional burden for me, and there's a chance I might benefit if I do release it.
Microsoft wants to create that additional burden. They're scared of a mass of developers all contributing, but not participating in a transaction for each contribution. It's why they're paying money to competitors with these agreements. They want to create a web of transactions to demonstrate there is commercial value in the ideas people like myself are contributing to the community.
They'll succeed this time too, because the business in general - not just Microsoft - doesn't like non-transactional effort. There's no opportunity to pry themselves a piece of it. That's why Microsoft is being received with open arms by so many of the Linux business community - they've found a way to introduce transactions where business can leverage value from what used to be a process that was closed to them.
In the end, it won't be Microsoft that sues someone who contributes an idea to the community, and runs foul of some undisclosed patent. It'll be a Linux business, someone like Xandros or Novell, and it'll only take a few lawsuits to take away that incentive for me (or anyone like me) to have to think twice before releasing that useful tool.
In many ways, it's another version of the embrace, extend, extinguish model, but it's starting to become clear just how long Microsoft has been planning this, and how determined they are to are to commercialise software freedom. I think it'll work for them too. They'll have a lot more support from business and government this time.
"I've got more toys than Teruhisa Kitahara."
I must admit I kind of think you're high. But then maybe it's just me.
Please stop stalking me, bro.