Slashdot Mirror
Linspire/Microsoft Agreement Useless to Users
Stephen Samuel writes "Groklaw host PJ has dissected the 'patent peace' agreement between Linspire and Microsoft, and has determined that what Linspire agreed to is next to useless for many users. Essentially, under the agreement Linspire software is almost unusable: 'You can't share the software with others, pass it on with the patent promise, modify your own copy, or even use it for an "unauthorized" purpose, whatever that means in a software context. You must pay Linspire for the software, but then the "covenant" says to use Linux, you must also pay Microsoft. That payment doesn't cover upgrades. Linspire said it was absorbing the initial fees, but I don't know about upgrades. New functionality means you lose your coverage or presumably must pay again.'"
I'd like to know Eric Raymond's take on this. Isnt he on the linspire board or something?
I think they have a great business-plan
1. Start a Linux distribution
2. Get Microsoft's attention
3. Get millions from Microsoft (more then they will ever earn selling it), agreeing to everything Microsoft ask.
4. Go out of business
I think more distributions should do it... (as long the really serious ones don't)
Microsoft's tactics in providing "patent agreements" remind me of the SCO days when they made an assumption that Linux "belongs" to them because of some vague "infringements". Based on this assumption, they start doing wonky things like charging $699 per seat for the right to use Linux, and other such nonsense.
MS is operating along the same lines. The assumption is that you owe Microsoft something for using Linux, hence the need for such agreements between MS and Linux vendors.
It's classic FUD, but I don't know if MS would actually sue anyone. Unlike SCO Microsoft has a bottomless pit of money, and yet MS may not be large enough to successfully try and destroy Linux via patent infringement lawsuits.
We'll see how it all plays out. Will Microsoft embarass themselves the same way SCO did? One thing's for sure, if Microsoft decides to play the patent game, they too are at risk of getting countersued for whatever patents they infringe (and based on how many software patents are out there, there's sure to be some).
To be honest I don't think they have a choice now.
In the eyes of the 'nix community they are tainted by this agreement and they will probably avoid on principal, so they must be banking that the new features (ttf, WMP10, DRM) are enough to tempt in people who do not know better.
I'd wish them luck but surely this had to be them shooting themselves in the foot and waving goodbye to their future business.
Much as I truly despise them, you have to admire MS for the effectiveness of this particular FUD campaign.
DRM as a feature?
You're right though - it will be interesting how the buying public reacts to this. The market will decide between truly free software like Ubuntu, which requires users to jump some admittedly easy hoops before playing restricted media, or Linspire, which makes media playing immediate, at the expense of giving up freedoms.
May the best distro win...
"I've got more toys than Teruhisa Kitahara."
Linspire have always targetted Windows switchers. They know full well that hardcore geeks would never use Linspire. The Linux community means nothing to them.
"You can't fight in here, this is the war room!"
A week ago, there was this article which said Microsoft excludes GPL3 from the Linspire deal, and I wondered whether Linspire had any significant userbase in the US
/. must simply ignore this deal and related news - it doesn't matter much.
That post got modded Interesting, but didn't get any replies, so I'm really not sure whether Linspire is alive in the corporate segment, which should be the segment that worries about patent suits... like SCO sued Daimler-Chryssler (?) and lost face.
I can't imagine a company like Linspire would inspire any confidence in knowledgable markets like in Asia... The manner in which they caved in during the Lindows trademark dispute with Microsoft was suspicious and intriguing as well.
At a guess, just how many customers does Linspire have, if any? A few hundreds? In which case, I think
If you keep throwing chairs, one day you'll break windows....
I don't think this agreement is relevant to users at all.
Basically, Microsoft says "we won't sue Linspire users as long as they only do X, Y and Z".
That doesn't mean in any way that anyone is preventing Linspire users from doing whatever they want. They can do A, B and C, just like Redhat users can. Microsoft just doesn't promise anymore not to sue them, just as it never promised not to sue Redhat customers. Which doesn't matter much, because Microsoft is just full of wind anyway.
Hopefully this will just put people off using Linspire, which is no big deal in the long term. Last I checked, Linspire was full of all manner of nasty closed-source shite which the world would be better off without. If the Debian developers aren't pissed off to the back teeth at the way some people (and not just Linspire) have bastardised their "100% i-tal forever" distro, they deserve sainthood in at least as many religions as there are platforms on which Debian runs.
Never forget, it was Linspire who provided a lot of the funding for Pidgin when it was called Gaim (which was so staunchly GPL that they didn't even make the usual OpenSSL exception; it was GNUTLS or no MSN), then -- as soon as they realised that the terms of the GPL meant they could never get the code all to themselves, cage it up and take away the Source Code -- left the developers right in the lurch with the AOL lawsuit.
Fortunately, the GPL prevailed; the developers were able to fork their own code and give it a new name, but it just goes to show how some people will double-cross you at the last minute.
Je fume. Tu fumes. Nous fûmes!
A Microsoft contract limits what you can do with what they perceive to be their property.
This is the crux of the matter.
They do *not* "perceive [it] to be their property." They *claim* it is their property, but refuse to prove in any way, shape, or form that it *is* their property.
So.
The rest of your post is essentially mumbling about contract law, of which you come close to admitting you know almost nothing. You are saying your opinion is worth more than someone who actually knows something about contract law?
There was no misinformation about the Groklaw post. PJ stated that the Linspire/Microsoft deal, which was touted as something good for the customer, is in fact *bad* for the customer. The customer is actually purchasing a product that is hobbled, and actually *using* the product pretty much voids the whole Linspire/Microsoft "value-add."
It was actually a very good dissection of the agreement, as it affects the customer. It shows that Microsoft most definitely got the better of the deal, and Linspire and their customers kinda got shafted.
But, anyone who deals with Microsoft ends up getting shafted.
Microsoft is to software what Budweiser is to beer.
Can't see why they went and buckled over the name, after all Lindows is a Surname which goes back some to the 1300's in the UK.
www.familysearch.org has 3 people with the surname of 'Lindows'.
1. DANIELL LINDOWS - International Genealogical Index / GE
Gender: Male Christening: 29 JAN 1607 Konigsberg In Neumark, Brandenburg, Preussen
2. GERTRUD LINDOWS - International Genealogical Index / GE
Gender: Female Christening: SEP 1620 Konigsberg In Neumark, Brandenburg, Preussen
bothe the children of JUERG LINDOWS and VRSULA MEKELBORGE.
Also the Surname of 'Lindow' has loads of people from all over the world, including the USA, Canada, Sweden, Denmark, Germany, Australia and China with various spellings of the name.
Also, if you do live in the US, and you do want DVD on your Linux box, you could just buy Mandriva which comes with LinDVD to watch your DVDs legally. Sure it's not open source software, but it seems to me that if you're really that worried about the legal issues, and actually want to watch DVDs on your computer (as opposed to your home theatre), then there are options available to you.
Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
I think the million-dollar issue with the included media codecs is legality. When you pick up Linspire, you have the benefit of knowing it'll work and that it's legit. On Ubuntu, in the US, most of the solutions violate patents (which may or may not be valid). Personally, I think patents on things like VC-1 or MPEG standards are stupid, but they're there.
Then there's the DRM. Currently, WMP DRM only works on Windows. If MS releases something for Linspire/Novell that allows DRM'd content playback, those distros have a leg up in accessing things that are protected by that DRM. However, this would be obviated if MS does as promised and creates a Silverlight-based DRM-supporting player for WMA/WMV.
My wife is a good example. She has an older Dell laptop but long admired my PowerBook, and wanted a new laptop for her birthday. So we bought her a MacBook Pro.
So I set it up for her (which mostly involved adding the MAC address to the wireless access list and installing a couple of apps) and turned her lose with it. Almost the first comment she made to me was that her favorite site (some home design TV show thing) wasn't showing the videos. Sure enough, HGTV's Design Star (I think it's called) site uses a codec that's not supported in Safari. Flip4Mac solved this, but I don't think it's reasonable to expect a less-technical user like my wife to figure out that a video codec is unsupported, discern that an application is needed to enable playback, then find, download, and install that app. Especially on "less-friendly" distros of Linux.
I agree with your assertion that the market will decide, but I wouldn't rule out the average user finding it annoying when something on the Internet that "always worked before" doesn't work on first boot. Whether that "first boot" experience is a factor in purchasing is something else.
Interested in a Flash-based MAME front end? Visit mame.danzbb.com
Every time someone says something like this I feel like the guy in a conspiracy movie that knows the truth and can't get anyone to believe him.
How many times do you have to be lied to and/or fucked over by Microsoft before you too will develop this completely healthy and rational hatred of their bullshit antics and tactics?
How many illegal acts by Microsoft that are used to crush competition, which in many cases (probably even most) has had superior technology, will it take before you treat them like the criminals they are?
If any individual had taken the actions Microsoft has taken, we would have already convicted them for fraud, taken away their shit, and thrown them in prison (maybe cushy rich white guy prison, but still locking them up.) But because it's a corporation, you seem to be willing to forgive them everything. Your corporate masters can do no wrong, eh?
If you don't hate microsoft (maybe hate is too strong a word) then one of the following things is true: 1 - you don't actually give a shit about the situation at all; 2 - you're totally ignorant of what the situation is; 3 - you're benefiting from the current situation and are enough of a morally bankrupt turd that you would pretend like it's all positive. I make no claims as to which of these is actually the case for you; I don't know you. But there is more than enough reason to at least dislike Microsoft and think that doing business with them is exclusively for the stupid, if not to be planning firebombings.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"