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.
We know that Microsoft claims to hold patents that Linux users are infringing... but they won't tell us which ones. What's new?
So there are two possibilities: either they've got a specific one or two that they're really able to show Kyocera that are troublesome, or they've just got this massive library of "probable" ones that Kyocera decided to give in to. What would be more interesting to know is who approached who about the deal. What does it permit? What did that cost?
Anyway, this is at the stage where it isn't using patent law, but is just using corporate risk expectations. Very dangerous... which is why MSFT doesn't want to show their hand.
Software patent lifetimes should probably get quite a bit shorter, too...
--
Educational microcontroller kits for the digital generation.
Kyocera Mita appears to be a "small" company - revenues for the parent corporation (Mita is their printer division, it appears) were a little shy of $3 billion in 2006, while Epson had revenues of $12.7 billion last year. Granted, I'm not sure how valid this comparison is, but if this disparity is typical, it could very well be that Kyocera decided it would be safer to play Microsoft's game than to potentially face a court battle they would have trouble fighting.
The GPL states that they may only distribute the code if they accompany it with the rights for any derivatives to use any patents it infringes. If they discover that they infringe some patents in Linux then they must stop distributing Linux until they have obtained a license to the patents that is compatible with the GPL (which means that anyone who is in the transitive closure of recipients of the code from them also gains the license). In summary, if they have obtained a license from Microsoft then either they are in violation of the GPL or no one else needs to obtain such a license and Microsoft's FUD evaporates in a puff of logic.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
Close, but those aren't the right laws. Here are laws.
MONKEYDOME!
0) Who run Microtown? STEVIE BALLMER RUN MICROTOWN!
1) Two competitors enter, ONE MONOPOLIST LEAVES!
2) Agree to the deal, or YOUR IP WE'LL STEAL!
3) Laissez-faire? FACE THE CHAIR!
"...started when Bill Gates ported BASIC."
He didn't port basic. He wrote a Basic interpreter for the 8080!
I am not a Microsoft fan. In fact I am a Linux user but give me a break.
If Bill Gates ported basic then the Samba team ported Microsoft networking and the Mysql team ported SQL!
Porting means you have the source code to a program and you get it to run on a new cpu. Gates, with some help wrote a Basic interpreter for a tiny cpu in assembly. He WROTE a version basic for the 8080. He didn't port it.
See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
I work for Sony, putting Linux into many different Sony products. I also lead the CE Linux Forum, which has a number of large of members from Japan. I can assure you that Linux is used in Japan in droves, and that the range of practices for obtaining Linux, from paying a vendor to downloading directly from kernel.org, is as broad there as anywhere else in the world.