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.'"

Comments

All I can say is...

[pallmall1]

Linspire should just expire.

Agreement useless to users?

[RuBLed]

Isn't it much more like Linspire/Microsoft Agreement makes Linspire useless? Additionally, that is an understatement also since the general idea of useless is that you won't get anything good from it. In this scenario, it should be Linspire/MS Agreement Toxic to Users.

Re:Agreement useless to users?

[jimicus]

Isn't it much more like Linspire/Microsoft Agreement makes Linspire useless?

Darn! Bet MS never saw that coming!

Sidenote: Do any of these companies signing these agreements actually read them? Because so far most of the agreements seem to be designed to stop the Linux distributor from distributing Linux. Either that or there's some massive get-out clause in all of them which everybody else has missed.

Great business-plan

[Anonymous Coward]

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)

SCO Deja Vu

[nurhussein]

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).

Re:SCO Deja Vu

[pallmall1]

Linspire will be releasing some Microsoft tech like audio and video codecs along with some document formating stuff and a few other things in their releases.

Linspire says that for now they won't charge users for these things. They may charge for upgrades and maintenance releases of their Microsoft proprietized "click-and-run" (CNR) distributed packages. If a Linspire user doesn't pay any charges set by Linspire, or Linspire doesn't pay Microsoft even if the user pays Linspire, the user is not covered by the Microsoft pledge not to sue (and the agreement actually doesn't protect users anyway). When a Linspire user downloads a CNR package, Microsoft now will be able to track the users identity. If the user gets a Microsoft tainted CNR component, Microsoft can then demand the user allows Microsoft or their agent (BSA, perhaps?) to audit all their software. If the user refuses, Microsoft can sue them for infringement, aided by the CNR server records.

This deal is nowhere near as benign as you try and describe. Remember, this is a deal with Microsoft. If they can't find IP violations in a linux distribution, they'll put it there and then cry "victim".

Re:Groklaw?? How about objective analysis instead?

[pe1rxq]

How about objective analysis instead?

How about reading the article and point out some actual errors in it?
I did, and most points she makes seem valid to me...

What facts did you use for your objective analysis of groklaw?

Missing the point...

[Genda]

So I'm no Kreskin... but M$ has never been subtle about it's desire to pretty much play Mongul Horde all over the face of modern computing. I think this is clearly M$ pulling an old tried and true lan out of their own gamebook and simply reverting to business as usual. I'm guessing the plan will look something like;

• Swallow a few tiny Linux distros whole, and at least assimilate them sufficiently to make certain that they can sing and dance like another Borg Drone.
• Claim that they're just like all the other Linux players, except they have that fresh new minted by M$ smell, ummmmm can't you just smell it.
• Play to the businesses that have migrated to Linux, and say "Y'all can come back home now, we're ready to give you want you're craving."
• All the while embedding their own crap throughout these bastard Linux babies, copywriting and patenting new code and software functionality, and DRM, and spyware, and embedded bits of their toxic dreck throughout the distros.
• They'll try to lay claim to things that don't belong to them, but they'll plead they were just trying to cover their proprietary code, muddy up the copywrite water and try desperately to tie real innovation up in a rats nest of layers, so in 5 to 7 years when they release their next real OS, Linux will be sufficiently hamstrung so they have a chance to compete. Or I'm guessing that's at least their hope.
• In the meantime, they'll vascilate between pretending to play nice, making vague, obscure, or veiled threats, making strategic partnerships with folks who want to coexist peacably (with absolutely no intention of playing nice), and all the while looking for ways to slip a sharp instrument between the 5th and 6th rib of this upstart OS that has caused them so much grief.

Have I missed anything? Probably. Y'know, if they put aside this whole Genghis Kahn, I gotta own the whole freakin world mentality, and just started committing themselves to doing good things for humanity... the rest would take care of itself. Oh well. This is going to be an interesting show! Who's got the popcorn!

Re:ESR

[ttnb]

I'd like to know Eric Raymond's take on this.

As a matter of fact it's not necessary to wait for a public comment from ESR to know his views. If anything, these events can only reinforce his views that he wants "to see Microsoft broken on the wheel not by government fiat but by enlightened consumer choice". (Source: Halloween Documents FAQ

Isn't he on the linspire board or something?

According to this post apparantly by Linspire's CEO Eric is (or at least still was on Feb 23, 2007) "one of many un-paid volunteers of the Freespire Leadership Board". I wouldn't be surprised if Eric reconsiders his involvement in that project in reaction to Linspire's agreement with Microsoft, but it's his choice of course.