Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Claims Patent On Elements of Embedded Linux?
Preedit writes "An InformationWeek story points out a recent deal between Microsoft and Japanese printer maker Kyocera Mita. Under the agreement, Kyocera obtained from Microsoft a license to patents used in 'certain Linux-based embedded technologies.' The question the author asks is why Kyocera needs a patent license from Microsoft to develop its embedded Linux products."
I used to be an embedded Linux developer.
However, I could more thoughtfully comment on this if the article revealed just what patents Microsoft believes Kyocera to be violating. It could have nothing to do with Linux; moreover, it could very well be a patent on some method of printing which is specific to the Kyocera hardware and just happens to be implemented as a Linux driver.
Looks more like FUD against Linux than anything else.
The society for a thought-free internet welcomes you.
I think it is more than fud...
By binding potential developers (and we will may never see what is in the agreement in total) to MS it may make it a lot harder for them to deliver products that work with linux.
Now everytime they go to release a driver legal are going to have to have a good hard look at driver and the MS agreement.
How long before it gets to be too much hard work and they not bother?
"developers, developers, developers" is still true. Without delivery of new products any OS will die. Kyocera Mita make stuff people want to use in business settings - printer/fax machines and stuff like that.
The Singularity is closer than you think
Quant
Or they just cross-licensed some proprietary stuff and threw in the 'linux' word for fun. Kyocera has been working with MS since at least the TRS Model 100 days - they built the hardware, MS supplied the software and that was - what - 25 years ago?
What does Kyocera get? The right to use patented Microsoft technology in its printers, copiers and "certain Linux-based embedded devices."
Maybe Kyocera just licensed Fonts/ODBC or some other mundane MS technology to use in their products. Food for thought.
Enjoy,
It's just the normal noises in here.
Show us the the source of this statment, or stuh teh fkuc up and go back to the caves of Redmond.
c++;
Many companies I've known won't use software if they aren't paying someone for support and a license (and, often, particular support guarantees and/or performance warranties.) I don't know anything about Japanese culture, but in business the need to have some else that's feet can be held to the fire if something goes wrong is a big deal.
Of course, you can get paid support (and sometimes licensing, when the software is under a dual OSS/commercial licensing model) for most OSS you might want to adopt in a business environment, so neither cultural nor business-based reluctance to use software without paying for it should be a major barrier to OSS adoption.
We know Microsoft has some patents involving anti-aliasing and other font rendering stuff.
We also know that UCLA has recently sued over the non-licensed usage of it's patents by a number of software technology firms, including Microsoft.
All your stolen Microsoft patents are belong to Cali!
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
If they can tie up enough hardware and software distributors and make it difficult to release anything commercially for linux, it will help kill it off or at least reduce it back down to a mere hobby and no longer a threat.
Once the next generation of hardware comes out, and you cant get a driver as its so tied up in the legal world that it can never escape, what will you have left to run? Why, officially endorsed Microsoft software and hardware of course.
It wont happen today, or tomorrow, but they have the time and money to think *really* long term ( like in decades ) on this
---- Booth was a patriot ----
Just to make sure Samba gets credit where samba is due... They wrote the spec, not Microsoft. If it weren't for them CIFS wouldn't exist as it does today. MSFT embraced and extended as always.
I've personally worked in two Japanese companies, in Japan. One massive, monolithic and very conservative, the other a young upstart with incompetent management. In both cases, accountability, or the avoidance thereof was all.
In the big one, any proposal/request had to be stamped by a long LONG line of people before it could be approved, so that if anything went wrong the blame was distributed. If there was no form in existence to suitably acquire said distributed blame, it was 'difficult'
(= impossible / forbidden / no)
In the other, they implemented a locked down linux across all workstations after a disgruntled former employee erased their main server. They also switched their server from Windows 2000 (it was a while ago) to Solaris. This was a company where having a shiny piece of paper that said you weren't to blame wouldn't make a lick of difference if the CEO was smacking you about the head.
In the first kind of company, nobody will ever get fired for opting for the Microsoft option. Microsoft is an infinitely appropriate designated recipient of blame. If your OpenBSD server gets owned, who do you point at?
That's all.
thx e
I knew a guy who left his wallet on the seat of the Yamanote-sen, THE loop around central Tokyo with a train in both directions about every 90sec packed solid during rush hour. He went back to the station & waited on the platform at the same door (they always stop at the same spot on the platform) and sure enough that train came back around & his wallet was still on the seat, with a full complement of contents. I think a big part of it was that there were enough people to watch it for him... ...clearly nobody was even game to carry it to an office. Japan has a long history of peer observation as a control mechanism.
thx e
Software patent lifetimes should probably get quite a bit shorter, too...
Software patents shouldn't exist at all, neither should patents for business methods. Only non obvious hardware implementations and unique solutions not already published should be patented.
FalconShould there be a Law?