Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

IBM Breaks Open Source Patent Pledge

Posted by CmdrTaco on from the who-saw-that-coming dept.

Jay Maynard writes "IBM has broken the pledge it made in 2005 not to assert 500 patents against open source software. In a letter sent to Roger Bowler, president of TurboHercules SA, IBM's Mark Anzani, head of their mainframe business, claimed that the Hercules open-source emulator (disclaimer: I manage the open source project) infringes on at least 106 issued patents and 67 more applied for. Included in that list are two that it pledged not to assert in 2005. In a blog entry, the NoSoftwarePatents campaign's Florian Mueller said that 'IBM is using patent warfare in order to protect its highly lucrative mainframe monopoly against Free and Open Source Software.' I have to agree: from where I sit, IBM likes Open Source only as long as they don't have to compete with it."

2 of 359 comments (clear)

  1. Re:You might not like them ... by Monkeedude1212 · · Score: 5, Informative

    Check out their website. The quotes they've listed.

    “ I have installed your absolutely fantastic /390 emulator. You won't believe what I felt when I saw the prompt. Congratulations, this is a terrific software. I really have not had such a fascinating and interesting time on my PC lately. ”
    — IBM Large Systems Specialist

    “ Such simulators have been available for a long time. One of the most complete (up to modern 64-bit z/Architecture) is hercules. ”
    — Michel Hack, IBM Thomas J. Watson Research Center

      An apparently excellent emulator that allows those open source developers with an "itch to scratch", to come to the S/390 table and contribute. ”
    — Mike MacIsaac, IBM

    IBM -HAS- said "Go ahead and rip our stuff off, it helps us in the long run"
    And now that its paid off, they're going for more money by killing it. Despicable.

  2. Probably an oversight by voss · · Score: 5, Informative

    Since only two of 171 patents were covered by the covet not to assert. IBM doesnt need those two patents to win its case.

    In any event the two patents are unenforceable under the doctrine of promissory estoppel. When IBM promised not to assert
    these patents others acted in reliance on that promise. I suspect IBM's lawyers knows the law sufficiently well to not try to
    do that in actual legal filings.