Slashdot Mirror
IO Data Licenses Microsoft's "Linux Patents"
eldavojohn writes "The Japanese computer manuracturer IO Data is the latest in line to license Microsoft's so-called 'Linux patents,' following the likes of Novell, Samsung, and Amazon. Yes, even the press releases use the word 'Linux' to describe these patents. From the press release: 'Specifically, the patent covenants apply to I-O Data's network-attached storage devices and its routers, which run Linux. Although the details of the agreement have not been disclosed, the parties indicated that Microsoft is being compensated by I-O Data.'"
I bet Kim Jung Il didn't license those "Linux patents" from Microsoft when he rolled out Red Star. Is that grounds for attacking North Korea?
There's no -1 for "I don't get it."
I wish I could run a scam as good as Microsoft's.
I might be holding a club behind my back. Should I choose to begin swinging this club, which I may or may not have, I can guarantee that I will not strike you with it, for a small fee.
UNIX/Linux Consulting
Eeeee-Eye-Eeeeee-I-O
Yours In Reykjavik,
Kilgore Trout
A mean bunch of bastards for claiming patents and not disclosing any kind of infringement. But the ones that buy into the scam, man, those are PLAIN IDIOTS.
NO SIG
Apple would claim they invented computers and patent "using a mouse".
Then, they would sue companies like HTC that only seek to innovate and market their creations.
I thought the first rule of Linux Patents is you do not talk about Linux Patents.
What happened? Did someone not bend over far enough?
I don't understand why the Linux developers are so quiet about this. Microsoft is building up a huge amount of momentum around the idea that Linux violates some arbitrary patents, and not a single Linux developer or company appears willing to call them out on it. Bizarre.
So basically, they are licensing Windows stuff. Nothing to see here. Also, while Novell did a patent deal wit Microsoft, it did NOT do a deal wrt linux, as there's no Microsoft code in linux (and most of us are smart enough to remove the potentially-encumbered mono-base from opensuse).
They're acting more like I oh double-u ee.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
...kowtow much?
Python: 'And then suddenly you have a language which says "we're all stuck with whatever the whiniest coder wants".'
About the only thing I can come up with is either FAT32 or NT filesystems, which *would* make sense in the case of IO Data.
Again they still do not actually say what specific patents !
This should be criminal, the Linux foundations should sue for libel damage.
Fuck it, maybe we all contact companies and ask for money for breaking our imaginary patents.
Also this company is out the USA, do they have crazy software patent laws too.
Thank god for the EU (I never thought i'd say those words)
I love how none of these articles include any info on which patents were licensed. If Microsoft has patents which cover algorithms in Linux, then there should be a list of patents numbers they can point to to say which patents are being covered in these License Agreements.
You know, back when Microsoft sued Tom-Tom, it came out that the patents in question covered certain features of the VFAT filesystem. I don't think that patent would affect Network Attached Storage. After all, if you're using Samba NFS, FTP or HTTP to access the files, it doesn't matter what filesystem is used on the NAS device. One would presume such a device would be using Ext3, Ext4, or maybe XFS or something.
Which makes me wonder, is Microsoft asserting patents which cover Samba, perhaps? The Linux kernel itself, even if you don't compile VFAT support into the kernel (or use the patched version which supposedly avoids the MS VFAT patents by removing some functionality)?
Sure seems that this is all a marketing driven FUD campaign, since no one is talking about what patents are in play here. If they have patents, they should come out and tell the Linux developers and the world which patents supposedly are infringing. If they won't tell anyone, then the courts should just put a stop to this crap - it's my understanding that there is a principle of law in many countries, including the U.S., where if you know someone is infringing your patent or copyright, and you don't take action to prevent further damages, you can't get the court to award you those damages. That is, you aren't allowed to 'run up the bill' by continuing to allow infringement to happen, just so you can sue for more money later?
If there Exist documentation that some invention was used before the patent was issued the patent is invalid.
The problem is that the open source community doe not have the central power structure and money for defence,
EFF?
any one?
There is not much of a reason to write a press release about these licensing agreements and patent covenants, other than to spread FUD in the Linux marketplace. Since the alleged intellectual property in question hasn't been put into the open, and IO is a storage company, one can assume the agreement surrounds the FAT filesystem IP: MICROSOFT EFI FAT32 FILE SYSTEM SPECIFICATION LICENSE AGREEMENT
.. or I guess "Linux Patents" for short then. Creative marketing, to make it sound like this glorious Linux stuff is really Microsoft's work. It you can't beat 'em, FUD 'em.
My hunch is this is then an covenant regarding "Microsoft technology patents that can be used in a product built on a Linux foundation"
When the Supreme Court invalidates software patents all these companies can go back to Microsoft and demand their money back. That should be fun to watch!
How long before they start hitting up specific distributions with their claims? Does any of this "established precendent" matter? Will it just be enough to scare off PHB's who don't know any better from Linux? Can they be sued or otherwise complelled to provide the exact patents in their claims? If any of those patents are found to be valid and distributions write them out of their repositories how liable are they for the past infringment? Software patents hurt innovation.
Shh.
You actually recommend using more than one ninja? Do you not understand the Inverse Ninja Law? It's pretty simple. Watch any martial arts film. A single ninja, by himself, will kick the ass of anyone less than Chuck Norris. However, a group of ninjas will always be defeated. There is a conservation of Ninjutsu at work, the more ninjas, the less power each of them have. If you want the job done right, send only one ninja.
- None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
As Linux has been fixed to not offend Microsoft's FAT32/VFAT patent. If these companies think that they are voilating this patent, they should do their own research or fix it so that they don't have to pay royalties to Microsoft.
I love how none of these articles include any info on which patents were licensed. If Microsoft has patents which cover algorithms in Linux, then there should be a list of patents numbers they can point to to say which patents are being covered in these License Agreements.
Don't hold your breath. Not releasing what is being licensed is probably part of the licensing contract. They might even have a patent pending on that business method. We tried asking them which patents Linux infringed on but they're too busy to list them all. They'll throw out numbers though like "235 patents free software violates that are ours!"
My work here is dung.
You can't really blame mickeymousesoft for doing what our overlords the content cartels them. Seeing all those RIAA lawyers in the 'just-us' dept and the VP telling the MPAA "we are your best friends" ALL of us should see whats coming. Very soon you will see the elected wind up drones start saying 'Linux = stealing'. And with the courts stacked with pro rich people right wing activist judges. Banks and insurance co's are small change the real power is the content cartels. When you control everything the people see and hear you rule. Name one other business that can sell the same thing twice without going to jail? ... the answer is none. Yet we are charged for TV thats already PAID for with commercials. They keep us divided with left/right el toro poo poo and FORCE us to pay for it with The Hippy News Network (MSNBC) The Clinton News Network (CNN) and White Trash News (Fox). To watch one you gotta pay for all 3. This dog and pony show is designed to keep the public distracted from how bad we are getting screwed by rich people. If the media took 10 min's to teach everyone the history of bucket shops in 1907 and apply that to wall street today (credit default swap) things would change in a hurry and it wouldn't be pretty.
The spelling and grammar police can kiss my ass
Look at it like a business process.
No distro is well capitalized.
Litigating a distro would *clearly* set off a hue and cry about monopoly practices thereby waking a sleeping giant.
Microsoft uses some millions annually to fund their protection racket process. They target companies marketing products in the U.S. that have valuations such that they can extract meaningful sums of money. Same forms and process for each litigation target. It's the equivalent of a sweatshop operation.
http://www.maxineudall.com/2010/02/should-economists-be-sued-for-malpractice.html
How is this not a potential qui tam suit just begging to be initiated?
That's a nice car you have there. You know I have evidence that it is stolen. No I won't show you that evidence, but if you pay me I won't go to the police with it.
"FAT32 or NT filesystems, which *would* make sense in the case of IO Data."
Why would that make sense? If IO Data makes Network Attached Storage, wouldn't you use either something like Samba or NFS (in which case, you would probably use Ext2/3/4, or maybe XFS or ZFS), or if you are talking about a lower level device, wouldn't you be using something like iSCSI or Fiber Channel where the device just looks like a hard drive attached to the network, and the Operating System on the other computer which is using it actually has the filesystem drivers? So, if the filesystem drivers are on a different server, how would the NAS device itself infringe?
It seems to me (IANAL) that Microsoft is potentially engaging in slander of title against Linux. Couldn't IBM, or any company that's contributed to the Linux kernel, sue Microsoft for this, and force MS to enumerate the alleged violations during the trial if not during discovery?
IO Data is a big name in Japan. They sell a lot of Computer and AV devices. In the US they aren't that big anymore. IO data was a pioneer in the Network Equipped Up-Converting DVD player. Not only could it play UPnP file sources, it could output them up to 1080i.
That's when they ran into trouble. Their HD player had nice Analog Component outputs to upconvert DVDs. That got them in trouble with license holders for DVD. Which wouldn't have happened except they started expanding in US, and then the guys at the MPAA started taking interest. I think they are a bit gun shy after that. So I can understand folding to Microsoft.
So, MS doesn't actually plan to overtake Linux, it just plans to make money off of other peoples' work. How long before they turn around and sue the developers of Linux?
Twinstiq, game news
Yup. And with all the cross-licensing deals companies end up entering into with MS, who ends up holding all the cards? MS cross-licenses with everyone else, who don't end up cross-licensing with each other. There's an imbalance in the force... Yet another barrier of entry for companies to have to surpass to compete with the gorillas...
Twinstiq, game news
When they licensed these patents, did they happen to disclose and identify these patents? Most people are still mystified as to what these patents are precisely.
What Microsoft is doing is simply a "protection racket" and need to be prosecuted under RICO.
1. Election law.
2. Finance law.
3. Drug law.
4 Patent law.
WISH US LUCK!!!
Damping absorbs vibrations. Dampening is caused by moisture.
". . . . the names of 57 patent violations that are in the Linux kernel at present."
~The Manchurian Candidate, the remake, starring Steve Ballmer.
Regards;
Like nuking a mosquito from orbit is a definitive solution.
There is no right to feel safe thru security vaudeville at the expense of everyone's freedom, privacy and tax money.
Microsoft's game here would end the moment someone posted to Wikileaks details of the claimed patents.
At that point, the patents would either be shown by the community to be invalid (millions of people would hunt for prior art), and/or the offending code would be stripped and reimplemented in a non-infinging manner (if possible).
i can think of only one reason, if they came up with what they claim to be their own 'ip', and it was proven, the code would outright get removed from linux, leaving microsoft with nothing to harrass with. they would also lack the weapon to coerce and subdue the i.t. world at the time when linux becomes established for good worldwide.
in any case, the community should look into this, and discover them, and remove them.
chances are high that they have claimed rights to some basic logic routine or procedure, thanks to the beyond shitty patent system in u.s., and are now waiting for acta to make their claim in u.s. globally valid. you know, since the places like europe werent so stupid enough to let such stupidity like being able to 'own' logical routines and constructs for anyone.
with all undue respect, american system has gone beyond failure, if it has (and it really has) come to the point of letting private people and organizations own logic and thought.
Read radical news here
fun game bashing things at other people
The article doesn't give a lot of details but Bishop's blog says:
"being compensated by I-O Data" as part of the deal.
Part of the deal? That doesn't tell us anything. For all we know Microsoft said, "Look, pretend you're paying us for this, it'll make us look good and we'll make it worth your while by cutting you a good deal on the rest of the agreement," and I-O Data shrugged and said fine. No need to assume extortion: this whole story might just be Microsoft marketing puffery.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
So when the heck is Torvalds, Torvalds lawyer to be exact, going to call Ballmer on this horseshit? It's been some years now, isn't it time to get this deal out in the open? And where is the DOJ or SEC on this? Freekin blatant market manipulation. MS needs to put up or shut up.
In EU, software patentes are illegal but accepted by the patent office. None of them ever was used in a court case. Come on Microsoft, come play here. I want to see in what kind of country I'm living.
The Wise adapts himself to the world. The Fool adapts the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the Fool.
I would be delighted to see Microsoft sued by a conglomeration of Linux advocates led by the Free Software Foundation.
Surely MS should go after Google for FAT patent infringement on the Linux kernel in Android. I wonder why not...Google would probably fight and potentially invalidate these patents and that would be the end of this MS revenue stream from everyone.
The problem is that we have companies benefitting from Linux, and to be fari, contributing to it, who have no qualms backstabbing the community that makes their business possible.
I wonder what will they do the day all the Linux community decides to take thier marbles to play elsewhere (using GPL 3 for a new operating system based on Linux) and letting them to support on their own their current offerings.