Slashdot Mirror
How the Open Invention Network Protects Linux and Open Source (Video)
This is a Google Hangout interview with Keith Bergelt, Chief Executive Officer of the Open Invention Network (OIN), which was jointly founded by IBM, NEC, Novell, Philips, Red Hat, and Sony to share their relevant patents with all Linux and Open Source developers and users in order to prevent patent troll attacks on FOSS, such as the famous SCO vs. IBM lawsuits that hampered Linux adoption during the early 2000s. It costs nothing to become a an OIN licensee, and over 500 companies have done so. Few people know, however, that individual developers and FOSS users can become OIN licensees; that you are welcome to do so, and it costs nothing. Read their license agreement, sign it, and send it in. That's all it takes. They also buy patents and accept patent donations. And "...if your company is being victimized by any entity seeking to assert its patent portfolio against Linux, please contact us so that we can aid you in your battle with these dark forces." This OIN service is called Linux Defenders 911. We hope you never need to use it, but it's good to know it's there if you do need it.
As many in the racketeering community would put it... giving cover to shopowners who prefer to operate in marked territory without paying protection money...
10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10
.
For example, look at this particular line in their licensing agreement at http://www.openinventionnetwork.com/pat_license_agreement.php : "Linux System" shall, at any time, have the meaning set forth, at that time, on www.openinventionnetwork.com.
Notice the infinite malleability of what a "linux system" is, and that it depends solely upon what OIN wants to say. So the rest of the licensing agreement contract has fixed values, but the definition of what shall constitute a Linux system is left to be freely redefined and pre-agreed to be bound to the definition of what the OIN says the definition is. Add "kludge" or "kick-in-the-ass" to the end of the so called open invention network OIN to get a load of their pigginess: OINK. No thanks. There's something definitely shady going on here.
Sooo I see a few things in the license that raise questions for me. IANAL, but here's my short list:
1) "Linux System" and "Linux Environment Components" are both poorly defined. In the definitions section it states that a Linux System is as defined on the website, but I could find no further definition when I looked (albeit quickly) around the links from the front page. Does it mean the kernel only (which is actually "Linux")? Does it mean userspace? What if my application is cross platform (Linux, BSD, etc), or is GPL and someone makes it cross platform?
2) The "exchange of value" for a contract seems to be based on "You get all of our patents, we get all of yours". What if I have 0 patents, and never plan to patent anything? Could I be held to have not held up my end of the bargin and be undeserving of the patent protection?
3) Limitation Elections are not transparent. Oracle signed on, but exercised a limitation election (as has Geeknet, based on http://www.openinventionnetwork.com/licensees.php). Which patents were excluded? If I sign on, how can I know which patents are explicitly not licensed to me via the OIN agreement?
I put on my robe and wizard hat..
It doesn't work/misses the point if companies like Microsoft go after those who implement it or use it rather than Linux itself.
OIN is a very active patent buyer/aggregator. If members get hit, they have a massive portfolio to fire back with.
As many in the racketeering community would put it... giving cover to shopowners who prefer to operate in marked territory without paying protection money...
That is a nice OS you've got there. It would be a shame if something happened to it.
Nikon's problem isn't that they can afford a lawyer. Android probably does violate Microsoft patents, but those patents are likely quite weak. No one knows for sure because people haven't gone public with the claims, only Barnes and Noble threatened to go public with Microsoft's claims and Microsoft dropped the claim as part of a "partnership" once they did threaten to go public.
Microsoft's goal with the lawsuit is to make Google OEMs pay to Microsoft more or less what they would have to pay for WinRT so that their isn't a cost advantage to Android. Effectively, from Microsoft's standpoint, leveling the playing field. They are suing companies that don't want to get into complex litigation. So for example they stayed away from Google and once they realized B&N was perfectly willing to go war, they backed off. Most likely Nikon doesn't want complex litigation either and will either pay Microsoft or also form a partnership where they release the same camera with WinRT or ....
Linux defenders helps small groups. IBM would love to be able to attack Microsoft's patents without being liable if they lose. From Microsoft's perspective heads they win $200k or whatever the developer is worth, tails they lose tens of millions to billions in patents. Which creates a terrific counterbalance that prevents Microsoft from going after small guys and racking up cheap wins. Good all around but doesn't do Nikon any good.