Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Microsoft Claims Patent On Elements of Embedded Linux?

Posted by Zonk on from the strange-bedfellows dept.

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."

9 of 191 comments (clear)

  1. Useless Article... by gillbates · · Score: 5, Interesting

    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.
    1. Re:Useless Article... by Mrs.+Grundy · · Score: 4, Interesting
      Absolutely,

      From the article:

      Is it adding proprietary Microsoft technology on top of embedded Linux?
      Could be...

      Hard to know what that means--it's deliberately vague.

      Now that's some reporting. There is really nothing to see here.
    2. Re:Useless Article... by davidsyes · · Score: 4, Interesting

      (I keisseikki will mod me troll or flamebait, but...)

      Based on the recent news of a major Korean company being under investigation for corruption/et cetera (this isn't localized to Korea, just mentioning it in proximity to this article), I will go on a limb and say microsoft is just wheeling and dealing and paying some exec to "go along with the script":

      "We'll claim you're violating one or more of our patents; doesn't matter which ones, if they're pending or not; doesn't matter if later the USPTO tells us we're full of it; doesn't matter if prior art exists. WE rule this world, and if you play by our terms, Sonsaengnim, you'll make a buttload of money."

      That's the business world for you.

      --
      Previously: "Linux... Toward the Sunrise..." Now: "Linux... Toward the-- No, now, part of Every Sunrise"
  2. Not just fud... by tqft · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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
  3. Maybe were reading this deal the wrong way.... by NullProg · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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.
  4. Re:They Don't. by pipatron · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The GPL has been proven to be unenforcable

    Show us the the source of this statment, or stuh teh fkuc up and go back to the caves of Redmond.

    --
    c++; /* this makes c bigger but returns the old value */
  5. Re:Japanese culture? by DragonWriter · · Score: 4, Interesting

    He thinks that it goes against the Japanese culture to use a technology without paying for it, that it shows disrespect to not pay for software licenses. He is not even allowed to consider using Linux or any other OSS for that matter.


    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.
  6. Re:Useless Article... UCLA owns it by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 3, Interesting

    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! --
  7. Re:Standad MS business practice... by Oriumpor · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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.