Red Hat Vows To Stand Up To Patent Intimidation

mrcgran writes "Eweek is reporting on Red Hat's assurances that can continue to deploy Linux without fear of legal retribution from Microsoft. This, despite the increasingly vocal threats emanating from Redmond. 'In a scathing response to Ballmer's remarks, Red Hat's IP team said the reality is that the community development approach of free and open-source code represents a healthy development paradigm, which, when viewed from the perspective of pending lawsuits related to intellectual property, is at least as safe as proprietary software. "We are also aware of no patent lawsuit against Linux. Ever. Anywhere," the team said in a blog posting.'"

Comments

Re:Moron?

[hasbeard]

Actually SCO vs. IBM involves copyrights, not patents. SCO accused IBM of wholesale copying of code.

What they promised

[Anonymous Coward]

They promised to remove any patent infected software. It's not like they promised to pay everybody's legal fees or anything like that.

Re:Quote goes on to say

[Iphtashu Fitz]

That lawsuit was never about patents. They claimed it did in the press but in the court it all boiled down to just copyright & contract claims. No patents were ever brought into play in the actual court case.

Is this an issue in Europe?

[ditoa]

I have read about this for a long time now and have been meaning to ask ...

Does this effect Europe? And more specifically the UK?

As far as I am aware Europe (and the UK) does not "do" software patents so even if MS is telling the truth about the Linux infringements are they even valid in Europe/UK?

Re:Is this an issue in Europe?

[abigsmurf]

It doesn't specifically affect EU or UK companies but technically they could be sued if they have a presence in the US. There are precedents for suing companies based in other countries because they serve US customers. Would be more hassle than it's worth though when they'd have easier US targets

Re:Finally

[MightyMartian]

It was during the Clinton years that the DoJ pursued Microsoft, and it was during the Bush years that they threw up their hands and said "Microsoft's doing just fine".

Re:What has to be considered

[j-cloth]

IBM in particular has lots of patents of thier own and i'm sure they could find a few that MS was somehow violating.

I was at a Redhat seminar this morning and they were talking about this exact issue. They said they belong to a consortium of companies (including IBM) who have pooled software patents for defensive purposes (I can't remember the name of the group, I want to say it's the Public Patent Foundation (www.pubpat.org) but that doesn't appear to be it). Specifically, if Microsoft tries to go against one of the members, they can search through their collection of patents, find one that MS violates, and counter sue with the desired effect of both sides either dropping it or cross licensing. Redhat's patent policy also states this (from http://www.redhat.com/legal/patent_policy.html):

One defense against such misuse is to develop a corresponding portfolio of software patents for defensive purposes. Many software companies, both open source and proprietary, pursue this strategy. In the interests of our company and in an attempt to protect and promote the open source community, Red Hat has elected to adopt this same stance. We do so reluctantly because of the perceived inconsistency with our stance against software patents; however, prudence dictates this position.

Re:Actionable? (It is in the UK)

[Anonymous Coward]

In the UK you can't make groundless patent threats like this, if Red Hat want they could take Microsoft to court and force them to identify the patents that they claim to be violated.

See section 70 of the 1977 patent act (http://www.ipo.gov.uk/patentsact1977.pdf) if you want to know the details.

Re:No lawsuit against Linux? Or Open src sftw?

[DamnStupidElf]

FUD unless you provide either patent numbers or at least the name of the company suing you.

Note that this does not involve Linux either, only Apache/Tomcat.

A good question to ask this company is what would happen if you switched to IBM's Websphere which is just apache and java.

Re:Sarbanes Oxley

[Anonymous Coward]

Sarbanes Oxley would only come into play if Balmer was trying to convince shareholders and potential shareholders that Linux wasn't a threat because of these secret patents and he hows that's not true. Sadly, from all the evidence I've seen Balmer is deluded and really does believe his hot air is true, so there's no crime.

You must be thinking of the Open Invention Network

[Optic7]

Open Invention Network - with Sony, IBM, NEC, Philips, RedHat, and Novell(?) as it's members, as well as Oracle, Canonical, and a few lesser known companies as licensees. From their about page:

Open Invention NetworkSM is an intellectual property company that was formed to promote Linux by using patents to create a collaborative environment. It promotes a positive, fertile ecosystem for Linux, which in turns drives innovation and choice in the global marketplace. This helps ensure the continuation of innovation that has benefited software vendors, customers, emerging markets and investors.

Open Invention Network is refining the intellectual property model so that important patents are openly shared in a collaborative environment. Patents owned by Open Invention Network are available royalty-free to any company, institution or individual that agrees not to assert its patents against the Linux System. This enables companies to make significant corporate and capital expenditure investments in Linux -- helping to fuel economic growth.

Open Invention Network ensures the openness of the Linux source code, so that programmers, equipment vendors, ISVs and institutions can invest in and use Linux with less worry about intellectual property issues. Its licensees can use the company's patents to innovate freely. This makes it economically attractive for companies that want to repackage, embed and use Linux to host specialized services or create complementary products.

I'm no fan of Bush but

[ClosedSource]

The case was over and the DoJ won. The idea that the DoJ is going to investigate MS forever is just wishfull thinking.

Besides the primary outcome of the case was that AOL, Sun, Real etc got their payday. It just turned out that the fate of the Netscape browser and the Java language on Windows really had little to do with the consumer.

The only significant issue was the agreements with OEMs and the remedy came to late to make much difference.

Re:Actionable?

[mrsteveman1]

MS probably does have a few valid patents in this case, but it's not about what patents MS has. This is about the fact that MS refuses to tell anyone which patents they are referring to thus making it impossible for the infringing code to be removed.

Saying that Microsoft's claims are invalid and thus no one should worry is 100% wrong. A resolution to this problem needs to be forced quickly, the situation can't remain as it is now because it has already hurt Linux companies and the community itself.

Either MS needs to be sued or they need to reveal the patents in question, but they can't just be ignored.

Red Hat & Novell Just hit with Patent Suit

[10scjed]

t appears that a company known as IP Innovation LLC is now filing suit against Red Hat and Novell, regarding a patent for "a User Interface with Multiple Workspaces for Sharing Display System Objects".

joining up the DOT.dots .. :)

[rs232]

"Acacia subsidiary IP Innovation LLC and fellow patent troll Technology Licensing Corp sued Red Hat and Novell in Marshall"

In July 2007, Acacia Research Corporation announced that Jonathan Taub joined its Acacia Technologies group as Vice President. Mr. Taub joins Acacia from Microsoft

Acacia Research Corporation .. has named Brad Brunell as Senior Vice President .. Mr. Brunell joins Acacia from Microsoft

--

Is there any disinterested law official anywhere on the planet that is concerned with what is going on here. A seller of inferior software facilitates the formation of a patent troll and extortion racket. It then uses threats from said same company to intimidate people into using its own product and scare them away from using competitors product.