Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft EU Decision Protects OSS Projects From Suits
rfc1394 writes "An article in Australia's IT News mentions that under its antitrust agreement with the European Union, 'Microsoft will publish an irrevocable pledge not to assert any patents it may have over the interoperability information against non-commercial open source software development projects.' Essentially, in addition to getting them to comply with the anti-trust decision, the EU has forced Microsoft to back off of its saber-rattling when it comes to EU open source projects. That protection in no way extends to US projects, of course."
That protection in no way extends to US projects, of course.
This, of course, insures profitable OSS projects will not be based in the US. Damn shame. Some of us like Tech jobs.
Having to work for a living is the root of all evil.
Unfortunately, the bureaucracy has a way of expanding in order to meet the needs of the expanding bureaucracy.
Umm... Is it just me or is this just mealy mouthed enough to get projects into HUGE trouble down the road when they are distributed commercially? Just what is Microsoft's definition of "non-commercial"?
This is a sig. This is only a sig. Had this been an actual sig you would have been informed where to tune for more sigs.
non-commercial open source software only? So any commercial use of that software will still open you up to infringement claims? If so, what's the point. MS is not worried about little Joey using FOSS in his basement for "non-commerical purposes". The use of that same software in a data center is apparently not covered by this agreement, so again... what's the point?
If you're a zombie and you know it, bite your friend!
In short, the right decision was made in spite of (and not because of) the European Commission.
"Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
That is actually pretty darn reasonable... You can develop open source software and IF you make a buck then you need to pay some minor royalities.
.NET is the way to go. So once your company makes a million bucks you need to start forking 3900 total (not per developer) over some money to Microsoft. Fair deal actually...
Think of it as follows. TrollTech charges something like 3900 USD, which translates into a Microsoft revenue stream (assuming 0.4%) of about a million dollars. Trolltech has a small business of up 200,000. After that you pay full dollar. So Trolltech is charging profitable open source companies more than Microsoft...
Don't know about you, but this does make Mono attractive on Linux. Mono on Linux is pretty good, and on Windows
"You can't make a race horse of a pig"
"No," said Samuel, "but you can make very fast pig"
Does the EU even recognize software patents?
Just look at how the RIAA tricked the various US attorney generals into accepting all those CDs for schools and libraries as a 'penalty' when they were just unloading dead inventory.
Does this mean that if Microsoft asserts patents against US OSS projects that they can relocate to Europe and be home free?
I hear a "giant sucking sound"...
How do you establish whether an OSS project is "here" or "there" anyway, when the developers are all over the place?
Richard Steven Hack - This sig is TOO GODDAMN SHORT TO DO ANYTHING USEFUL WITH! MORONS!
lunch
What exactly is it the US produces now, other than food? Knowledge? With both China and India graduating more and more engineers and scientists the US's lead may not last long. One thing they both need are accountants and US accountants can make a boat load of money showing Chinese and Indian companies how to setup an accounting system. Actually as my sister is a CPA, Certified Public Accountant, and runs her own business, I've thought of suggesting she learn Mandarin Chinese then go to China.
FalconShould there be a Law?
Indeed, Microsoft's strategy in this respect (->SCO) hasn't been very successful up to now. Which doesn't mean they didn't try.
Not all problems: Nobody claims 9/11 was done by MS.
But seriously, MS has a long history of applying unfair methods against their competition (see e.g. DR DOS, OS/2, Java). And they are seeing Linux/OSS as threat (see e.g. the Halloween documents), and already target them (SCO law suit payed by MS, dirty playing in the OOXML standardization process).
The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
Sure, or anywhere else that recognises that you can't patent mathematics. Like most of the planet.
"Remember the last 'punishment' they gave MS for anti-trust violations? They forced MS to unbundle media player from XP. But the idiots didn't require MS to proportionally, or even at all, reduce the price of the stripped down XP. So MS sells two versions of XP in the EU - regular XP and stripped XP for the same price and no one buys the stripped-down XP. Doh! Big freaking homer doh!"
Well, you're half right. It was the unbundling idea itself that was stupid, not the price. This was a gift to Real and provided zero value to EU consumers and businesses.
In that way it was very much like the US antitrust effort - it was driven by and crafted to benefit specific MS competitors rather than consumers. The remedy was pretty much what the people behind the scenes wanted. Just because a company is anti-MS, doesn't mean it's pro-consumer or pro-FOSS. This is a lesson that many will learn when the real IBM rears its ugly head.