Slashdot Mirror


Microsoft Joins Open Invention Network (OIN), Will Grant a Royalty-Free and Unrestricted License To Its Entire Patent Portfolio To All Other OIN Members (globenewswire.com)

Microsoft said Wednesday it had joined the Open Invention Network (OIN), an open-source patent consortium. As part of it, the company has essentially agreed to grant a royalty-free and unrestricted license to its entire patent portfolio to all other OIN members. From the press release: By joining OIN, Microsoft is demonstrating its commitment to open source software (OSS) and innovation through collaborative development. With more than 2,650 members [Editor's note: the members include Google, IBM, Red Hat, and SUSE], including numerous Fortune 500 enterprises, OIN is the largest patent non-aggression community in history and represents a core set of community values related to open source licensing, which has become the norm. "Open source development continues to expand into new products and markets to create unrivaled levels of innovation. Through its participation in OIN, Microsoft is explicitly acknowledging the importance of open source software to its future growth," said Keith Bergelt, CEO of Open Invention Network. "Microsoft's participation in OIN adds to our strong community, which through its breadth and depth has reduced patent risk in core technologies, and unequivocally signals for all companies who are using OSS but have yet to join OIN that the litmus test for authentic behavior in the OSS community includes OIN participation."

Erich Andersen, Corporate Vice President and Chief IP Counsel at Microsoft, said, "Microsoft sees open source as a key innovation engine, and for the past several years we have increased our involvement in, and contributions to, the open source community. We believe the protection OIN offers the open source community helps increase global contributions to and adoption of open source technologies. We are honored to stand with OIN as an active participant in its program to protect against patent aggression in core Linux and other important OSS technologies."
Further reading: Why Microsoft may be relinquishing billions in Android patent royalties.

103 comments

  1. Sooo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That would be the Embrace step.

    1. Re:Sooo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't you mean:
      1. Engulf
      2. Devour
      ?
      BTW my captcha was "swallows"!

  2. I don't understand by andydread · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Microsoft had been operating a patent shakedown against open source for a while now. Why is Microsoft doing this? Doesn't add up.

    1. Re:I don't understand by NicknameUnavailable · · Score: 2

      I want to believe they're reforming, but there's a little voice in my head screeching "IT'S A SCAM" as autistically and frantically as it can muster. Time will tell.

    2. Re:I don't understand by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 0

      It's not the same guy at the top. Microsoft is changing.
      The same thing has been happening to Apple since Tim Cook took over, but not in a good way.

      --
      #DeleteFacebook
    3. Re: I don't understand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      NOBODY FUCKING CARES!

    4. Re:I don't understand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      open science and all of these open-crap (even more open source) is a lie to give corporations free access to free highly skilled labour.

      we need free software and critical science not corrupted corporate co-opted opensource

    5. Re:I don't understand by nitehawk214 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Step 1: Embrace

      --
      I'm a good cook. I'm a fantastic eater. - Steven Brust
    6. Re:I don't understand by Bite+The+Pillow · · Score: 2

      They also do not have to license things like Android from the other members. It's likely a financial decision.

    7. Re:I don't understand by LetterRip · · Score: 1

      Microsoft had been operating a patent shakedown against open source for a while now. Why is Microsoft doing this? Doesn't add up.

      Step 1), transfer all important patents to a patent holding company subsidiary that licenses your patents back to you, and gives you all licensing profits.

      Step 2) sign up for patent sharing group, and now that all of your patents aren't "yours", they are not part of the patents required to be shared

      Step 3) PROFIT!

    8. Re:I don't understand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      It's most likely because their useful patents life is coming to an end. Remember Patents only last 17 years, what was 17 years ago? Windows 2000/Windows ME. Take note of the compatibility level of ReactOS and WINE.

      At some point, very soon, the OSS community will be able to re-implement Windows XP's API's, and damn near everything but games needs only XP level compatibility to work. Games still need the extended DirectX API, but XP is DirectX9 at most, which covers basically every non-64bit windows game.

      So Microsoft might be looking at trying to stem some blood loss should a "Windows XP compatible OS" come out of nowhere. Good god there's multi-billion dollar multi-national enterprise businesses that would love to stop having to upgrade Windows versions, and if ReactOS could fill that with a look-and-feel on top of compatibility, Microsoft will be the first on a long list of software vendors to see their "subscription bullshit" revenue streams start to be eroded.

      The entire reason enterprises prefer subscription schemes is because it makes it less of a pain in the ass to track how many copies of AutoCAD, Adobe CC and MS Office you have. You simply pay for X many licenses of the machines you actually have, rather than paying once for the software, and then having to throw the entire machine out, software and all, because you can't transfer the license, or the obstacle to transferring the license costs a few hundred dollars in some technicians time.

    9. Re:I don't understand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Software is an asset with depreciation tables. Leasing software is a direct business expense. I suspect the difference is exciting to someone.

    10. Re:I don't understand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yes, Microsoft is changing for the worse. Never before did Microsoft try to force or sneak OS updates on to people. Never before did they embed spyware and adware into their operating systems. Never before did they make the OS crippleware and forbid the user/owner from controlling their own computers.

      Satay Nutella is a scumbag and FAR worse than Ballmer or Gates.

    11. Re:I don't understand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I despise M$ as much as anyone, but I'm going to have to ask for a [[citation]] to show that M$ actually did this.

    12. Re:I don't understand by atari2600 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You're right. I quit reading /. over a decade ago because I couldn't get past the narrow-minded (I was one of them at one point) comments about any company trying to do the right thing. Came back here today to see if things had changed. Nope. The guy at the top wants change and it's been happening. Despite what a very small vocal and idiotic minority (on /.) and other websites think.

    13. Re:I don't understand by x0n · · Score: 1

      You're right. I quit reading /. over a decade ago because I couldn't get past the narrow-minded (I was one of them at one point) comments about any company trying to do the right thing. Came back here today to see if things had changed. Nope. The guy at the top wants change and it's been happening. Despite what a very small vocal and idiotic minority (on /.) and other websites think.

      Amen, brother. All that's left now is the very worst dregs of whatever reasonably intelligent, cautious and open minded community that once belonged here. I only came over to see what sort of response I'd see -- I guess it's just a habit. It's been ten years since I bothered with this place either. This announcement is just good for everyone. There's been a seismic shift within Microsoft. It's fascinating to have lived through the transition. All this time I've continued to run Linux and Windows at home and work for different reasons. Now, I sit here with Windows 10 with WSL (ubuntu 18.04 embedded) on a single device (surface book 2), and can switch seamlessly between platforms with a single IDE (vs code) and write code that targets any platform. Even the Windows console is turning into xterm with the new conpty plumbing (a proper pseudo tty) and x3.64/ecma48 support. What world is this?

      --

      PGP KeyId: 0x08D63965
    14. Re:I don't understand by x0n · · Score: 0

      Yes, Microsoft is changing for the worse. Never before did Microsoft try to force or sneak OS updates on to people. Never before did they embed spyware and adware into their operating systems. Never before did they make the OS crippleware and forbid the user/owner from controlling their own computers.

      Satay Nutella is a scumbag and FAR worse than Ballmer or Gates.

      The forcing of critical updates on Windows users - who steadfastly delay updates for weeks - is for the betterment of everyone. Part of the problem of having the broadest reach with a desktop platform is that you have a fair amount of morons to deal with who can't just save their work and let WU do its job. Without this, we'd be dealing with far more malware that we currently have to deal with. Unfortunately idiots clicking "yes, please run this EXE attached to my email" who hammer through UAC prompts (or who have turned it off) ignoring all warnings will always exist.

      --

      PGP KeyId: 0x08D63965
    15. Re: I don't understand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Their useful patents are coming close to expiring. The open source community has already legally and reliably reverse engineered and reimplemented key microsft tech for interoperability eg ntsf, smb. Even native directx games are working with great success inside linux through the work in dxvk, wine and proton. Microsoft is putting their patents on the table but they aren't worth that much anyway. In exchange they get access to other patents worth far more than theirs are and they get it all for free.

    16. Re:I don't understand by 605dave · · Score: 2

      I think you are looking for "IT'S A TRAP"

      --
      Be kind, for everyone you meet is fighting a difficult battle. - Plato
    17. Re:I don't understand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The forcing of critical updates on Windows users - who steadfastly delay updates for weeks - is for the betterment of everyone.

      Your opinion is acknowledged and rejected. Sorry, but that is not Microsoft's or your decision to make.

      Oh and by the way, no, it isn't. It makes everything worse. Less control over your possessions is always worse. There is absolutely no way you're going to be able to shill and spin crippleware and spyware as somehow being acceptable.

    18. Re:I don't understand by Burz · · Score: 2

      Because they succeeded (intentionally or not) in killing Android with steep patent royalties and managed to get the EU to fine Google >4bn Euro for the privilege of writing Android and receiving mainly ad revenue for it. So Google is going to abandon Android now and is soured on the mobile OS market - MS has to shift its patent royalty strategy. MS probably sees opening their old/expiring patents (former Android cash cow) as a PR win.

    19. Re:I don't understand by eneville · · Score: 2

      You're right. I quit reading /. over a decade ago because I couldn't get past the narrow-minded (I was one of them at one point) comments about any company trying to do the right thing. Came back here today to see if things had changed. Nope. The guy at the top wants change and it's been happening. Despite what a very small vocal and idiotic minority (on /.) and other websites think.

      The guy at the top is the collective shareholders.

      A thought I've been wondering is if they see maintaining an OS is profitable any longer. People are sick of updates and I suspect to see Windows fade even further into insignificance and their product base to move to a more portable platform. If only this had happened a very long time ago.

      In other news, a very early and irrelevant MS-DOS was open sourced.

      Honestly, I don't know if the company has changed, I don't know if there's a chance in the future of MS withdrawing from Open Source efforts. I do suspect they've recognised the OS market has gone away and software as a service is their only hope.

    20. Re:I don't understand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I wouldn't mind if the forced updates were turned on by default, as long as there was a way for me to turn them off if I want to.

      Perhaps if the update process were better, people would have been more likely to update regularly. My Windows computers get out of date because I don't always want to restart them for an update. My Linux computers are always up to date because I never have to restart them, unless I'm doing a kernel update.

    21. Re:I don't understand by x0n · · Score: 0

      The forcing of critical updates on Windows users - who steadfastly delay updates for weeks - is for the betterment of everyone.

      Your opinion is acknowledged and rejected. Sorry, but that is not Microsoft's or your decision to make.

      Oh and by the way, no, it isn't. It makes everything worse. Less control over your possessions is always worse. There is absolutely no way you're going to be able to shill and spin crippleware and spyware as somehow being acceptable.

      A shrewd technical analysis and firm rebuttal there, cheers. I can only assume you're not old enough to remember the days of unpatched windows boxes connected directly to the internet, spewing out thousands of connections per second across entire classes of networks, looking to spawn another copy of slammer/code red/etc. Windows on the desktop is not going away, but thanks to these update policies, the chances of another worm outbreak is pretty slim to none. Pragmatism is not always in the form you wish it would be.

      --

      PGP KeyId: 0x08D63965
    22. Re:I don't understand by Merk42 · · Score: 1

      What? You're not foaming at the mouth with rage from the mere thought of MIKKKRO$OFT? You must be a SHILL!!!11

    23. Re:I don't understand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ..by making stuff Open Source and Royalty Free??? Wow, so GNU/Linux must be really evil!

    24. Re:I don't understand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who cares? This is Slashdot! Microsoft did ${thing}, so it's automatically bad.
      It's still bad even if it's something Slashdot has wanted them to do and/or something they've applauded others for doing.

    25. Re:I don't understand by Bobfrankly1 · · Score: 0

      It makes everything worse. Less control over your possessions is always worse.

      Yes, because companies that either delay or outright refuse to update has brought us such wonderful things. Why, if everything was updated properly, we'd miss out on the wonders of botnets, and exploits that were patched 5 years ago raging through hospitals.

    26. Re: I don't understand by brunes69 · · Score: 1

      It's pretty simple. As the world moves to cloud, the value of the source code for services is not as high as it once was.

      Imagine if all the source code for Office365 was posted today. You would find throughout the code innumerable references to dependancy cloud services hosted on Azure. It would not honestly be of much use to copy without also having all of those services also copied, AND the infrastructure orchestration needed to run them.

      Now, is there still value in cloud code, to learn from and draw inspiration from. It's just that the barrier to entry now is so much significantly higher that cloud vendors don't have to worry so much about "secret sauce".

    27. Re:I don't understand by technosaurus · · Score: 1

      Because their patents are not actually owned by MS. They have their own trolls that sell them licenses (from overseas tax havens) Those trolls can continue business as usual and still (threaten to) sue OIN members. The only thing that changed is that now they cannot sue Microsoft.

    28. Re:I don't understand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So, I saw in a dream, that If I were a major software company with the clout and behavior similar to Microsoft, then I'd simply want other companies' patents, because my own company's patent portfolio is not as strong anymore, and a lot of that is thanks to Android and supercomputing. It may have turned out, that some of the technologies I want to use in my proprietary operating system, are already protected by patents owned and protected by an OIN member. Not being able to use those patent-protected technologies has become a roadblock in developing new product -- especially in the cloud. Maybe one of the OIN members has threatened to sue my expansive software company for patent infringement relating to a product that my company has already released, and the less-expensive compromise offered was to join OIN.

      btw, There are companies that are not in "OIN", and Nokia and Apple are a notable absence.

    29. Re:I don't understand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Android is well and alive. Windows Phone, though...

      Google is not going to abandon Android, but they have Fuchsia in the works.

    30. Re:I don't understand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You don't understand how full of shit you are?

    31. Re:I don't understand by Isaac-Lew · · Score: 1

      Please give examples of Microsoft patents that aren't covered under this agreement.

    32. Re:I don't understand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sorry son, your argument was non-existent and therefore required no rebuttal.

      Technicalities have nothing to do with anything, but nice strawman you've made there. This is about user control and choice and how neither you nor Microsoft are in any position to tell people what they can and can't do with their own computers. The internet also doesn't belong to you or Microsoft. How about you stop being such a busybody douchebag loser and mind your own business?

      updates != improvement
      updates = change, which may be good and/or bad. In Microsoft's case, they always make things worse and now they force it upon you and spy on you at the same time as serving up advertising right in the OS. Soon tech illiterate little kids like you will be paying a subscription to Microsoft just to be able to use your computer.

    33. Re:I don't understand by lord_rob+the+only+on · · Score: 1

      Step 2: Realize you cannot beat what is free
      Step 3: Try not to be extinguished
      Step 4: Adapt or die
      I don't know man but look at Windows phone, it's been dead for years. That's my own opinion, but if there wasn't a free Android OS, Windows Phone would still be alive and kicking. Same for BlackBerry.

    34. Re:I don't understand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Analogy fail.

      What you should have said:

      "There really needs to be a law that forces people to update their cars to newer versions multiple times every day."

    35. Re:I don't understand by terjeber · · Score: 1

      The '90s called, they want their Microsoft Haters back.

    36. Re:I don't understand by terjeber · · Score: 1

      Please tell me you are not this dumb. Seriously. Grow up!

    37. Re:I don't understand by 605dave · · Score: 1

      Oh I don't hate MS anymore. I did in the 90s though. I was just lamely trying to Ackbar the situation

      --
      Be kind, for everyone you meet is fighting a difficult battle. - Plato
    38. Re:I don't understand by technosaurus · · Score: 1
  3. The only losers ... by Alain+Williams · · Score: 3, Insightful

    are lawyers. I can't find it in my heart to grieve for them.

    1. Re:The only losers ... by Actually,+I+do+RTFA · · Score: 1

      And startups. Mostly startups.

      --
      Your ad here. Ask me how!
    2. Re:The only losers ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Startups can join for free, so how do they lose?

      I still think it's a trap, but I don't think this is it.

    3. Re:The only losers ... by Guybrush_T · · Score: 1

      So. True.

      The big winners of the patent wars were lawyers. To defend against patents, you need more patents, ... and it never ends. The big losers are companies (including those who innovate, starting with startups), the winners are lawyers. But they bring nothing good.

      I was kind of thinking this would never end -- how happy I was to discover the OIN network. Well done. Being inside OIN is much safer for companies than being outside (the protection is great). When everyone is inside, only patent troll companies will be outside, and OIN might be able to join forces to bankrupt them.

      A nice way to effectively change the patent system without changing the law.

  4. IONAFL... by Type44Q · · Score: 0

    I'm obviously not a fucking lawyer but they're clearly trying to form a cartel. As this is Winblows we're talking about, hopefully it'll be 'too little, too late' and their gapeware will die that much needed death.

    1. Re:IONAFL... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      No, the OIN cross licenses everything to all it's members. Joining it is free, you just have to agree to cross license all of your relevant patents as well. I still think it's a trap, but it's not a cartel.

  5. Obligatory Star Wars by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 1

    It's a trap!

    --
    #DeleteFacebook
  6. Quit promoting the giving away of code by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What next, an open consortium for waiting on tables for free? For becoming a doctor and practically living under a bridge while practicing? Better than the complete opposite like lighting cigars with hundred dollar bills and owning a personal plane, etc. But really...

    Everybody deserves to make a living at what they are doing, programmers included. Chances are they decided to become programmers because the jocks pushed them around and got the girls while the dorks got their hand for a date, and so they had to delay a life out of necessity.

  7. Re:Who cares?... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Your mother called,

    She said to tell you

    STOP PROJECTING you cellar dwelling bottom feeding rat !

    I personally found it a bit harsh towards rats but, your mother knows you best.

    also,
    in other news
    the world has seen an adverse reaction to the whole debacle of people falling into holes
    holes are now seen as the major cause for the decline in humanity
    and as such
    holes are being prosecuted and burnt at the stakes.
    holes are being discriminated against for doing what it is that holes do
    holes need protection from humans
    Hole Lives Matter
    Save a Hole today !
    Hole Lives Matter

    caption : sycamore

  8. Interesting but... by Gravis+Zero · · Score: 3, Insightful

    This doesn't pass the smell test. They definitely have an angle here, we just don't know what it is.

    --
    Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
    1. Re:Interesting but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They definitely have an angle here, we just don't know what it is.

      Improved interoperability. Greater adoption of their implementations. Access to similar resources from others who are willing to make the same offers.
      It's basic cooperation, in a formal model. This bypasses a lot of redundant effort and/or lawyer efforts.

      It also gives the big players some very straightforward blame options if something from a smaller company ends up being unsafe. Eject the small company, write a press release, invite a new small company that just happens to have the same staff into the group, and carry on as before. This method of protection works for intentional vulnerabilities as well as accidental ones, so it provides an easy PR pathway to implement backdoors and tracking that autoforwards to government (or similar) agencies.

      How much weight you give to each reason is up to you, but both can be true.

    2. Re:Interesting but... by alvinrod · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Perhaps it is because as they continue to transition towards selling subscriptions to their software and the like, it doesn't hurt them to join, especially if it means that they get free use of all of the IBM patents that might be useful in expanding into other service areas without having to worry about litigation. Perhaps these companies are waking up to the fact that the billion dollar lawsuits over technology patents drag on for years, often to a point where the technology isn't even relevant and that the only people who actually get anything after the smoke clears are the lawyers. Those are two easy guesses, but not necessarily good.

      After doing some additional reading, I'm not even sure if the summary is correct. If you look at the OIN website it just talks about Linux. The do have a list of all of their owned patents which does include some that were developed by Microsoft. Perhaps they tossed a few out there as a show of goodwill, but I'm not certain that this gives every member royalty-free licenses to all of Microsoft's (or other member companies) patents.

    3. Re:Interesting but... by Registered+Coward+v2 · · Score: 2

      This doesn't pass the smell test. They definitely have an angle here, we just don't know what it is.

      It only applies to Linux, and gives MS the opportunity to develop anything they want base don Linux without worrying about a patent infringement suit; plus could partner with OIN to fight patent trolls. A plus is invalidating a troll's claim would apply across any possible infringement, protecting their closed source business as well. They aren't going to get into a patent fight over Linux; so why not join forces to enhance your ability to destroy trolls?

      It also reduces any concerns someone using an MS Linux product that they may get embroiled in a patent suit.

      The money is in the support, so anything that eases that transition is useful.

      So yea, I agree they have an angle.

      --
      I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
    4. Re:Interesting but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > This doesn't pass the smell test. They definitely have an angle here, we just don't know what it is.

      Haters gonna hate, that's what it is and that's the source of your confusion. Just look in the mirror. This is no longer the Microsoft you love to despise.

      If Slashdotters only grew the fuck up, they wouldn't have to act so surprised and confused. I've been seeing the blind foaming-at-the-mouth nerd-rage on here for decades. Unlike MS, *that* is never going to change, no matter what Microsoft says or does.

    5. Re: Interesting but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey look it's the guy scammers love because he keeps on falling for scams over and over.

    6. Re:Interesting but... by Cajun+Hell · · Score: 1

      This doesn't pass the smell test.

      I'd say the opposite. It should be a trap, but it doesn't smell like one, and I don't even see how it can be one.

      --
      "Believe me!" -- Donald Trump
    7. Re:Interesting but... by squiggleslash · · Score: 1

      It's not that hard. There are enough patents in the OIN pot that Microsoft reasons they'll save more money being a member and not having to pay royalties than they'd ever hope to get by licensing their own patents to the OIN members.

      And that's the entire point of the OIN.

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    8. Re:Interesting but... by jabuzz · · Score: 1

      Ok but can we have exFAT support in the kernel now without having to download legally dubious Fuse support?

    9. Re:Interesting but... by Registered+Coward+v2 · · Score: 1

      Ok but can we have exFAT support in the kernel now without having to download legally dubious Fuse support?

      If the only legal issues are MS patents then the rhetorical answer is a qualified yes; as someone would have to make a convincing argument to add it to the kernel. OTOH, the developers / copyright owners to fuse can become an OIN licensee and remove any legal impediments to using MS patents.

      --
      I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
    10. Re:Interesting but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      *facepalm*

      Shilling or just naive beyond belief?

      If you really are that green then I have a bridge for sale if you are interested, kid. Ask your parents first.

    11. Re:Interesting but... by terjeber · · Score: 1

      Go see a psychiatrist. Your paranoia is acting up.

    12. Re:Interesting but... by Gravis+Zero · · Score: 1

      Right because Microsoft had a "come to Jesus moment" and is on the straight and narrow with only the open source community's best interests in mind. That's what's called a delusion.

      --
      Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
    13. Re:Interesting but... by terjeber · · Score: 1

      Sigh. The delusion is the religious who cling to ancient beliefs despite all evidence they are mentally ill.

  9. Smart Move by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    This is a brilliant move by Microsoft. This gives them full access to OIN software, without having to give anything away in return. Technically they have to allow other OIN members access to their patented software, but everyone knows nobody in the OSS community wants anything to do with M$ code, so in practice, they get everything and give nothing.

  10. Wow! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The Patent system sucks.

  11. Does anyone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Want their phone software?

  12. Microsoft has changed by dHagger · · Score: 1

    All those who are sceptical towards Microsoft's Open Source commitment appears to fail to realise that Microsoft under Nadella leadership is a very different company than during the Ballmer era (or the Gates era before that). Today the focus is all about subscription services and the cloud. They are making sure everything works fine with their cloud and subscription services, so they can rake in money that way. Want to move your Linux services to the cloud? Microsoft wants you to choose them instead of Amazon or Google so you realise how good all their other services are and start paying for them as well. Are you a developer? Well, then Microsoft want you to know that they have all the Open Source tools you need to run your applications in their cloud. Need a database? Move your MySQL database to Microsoft's cloud and take advantage of all their other database solutions while you are there. And so on. The software you can install yourself (like Windows) are nowdays just stepping stones to push you into their cloud, where you pay a few bucks a month instead of a bit more every few years.

    1. Re:Microsoft has changed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe I would believe you if not for the shenanigans related with Win10 forced upon us, spy - logging, shotgun marrying to windows store etc.

    2. Re:Microsoft has changed by Rob+Y. · · Score: 2

      Having Windows 10 spy on you is part of their re-focused cloud business model. They still own the Windows platform, and in order to keep it 'cheap' enough to continue to compete with ChromeOS, MacOS and yes, Linux - while still monetizing it, they're gonna spy on you and hope that enough users keep Bing as the default search engine for them to make money selling ads there. Of course, some people won't stand for that - but those people have already found a way off of Windows.

      But PC business software is dead - as far as Microsoft is concerned. They know enough companies are still stuck on 3rd party Windows apps to keep the monopoly going more or less indefinitely, but they're cash cow Office apps are now essentially web apps. I use Outlook to access my work email when I work from home - on Linux...

      Speaking of Bing... now that Google's shutting down Google Plus rather than endure bad press for a product that will never compete with FaceBook, I wonder if Microsoft will similarly accept that Bing will never compete seriously with Google. Different markets, I know. Bing vs Google doesn't have to deal with the network effects of 'everybody's already on Facebook'.

      --
      Posted from my Android phone. Oh, I can change this? There, that's better...
    3. Re:Microsoft has changed by Bobfrankly1 · · Score: 1

      Speaking of Bing... now that Google's shutting down Google Plus rather than endure bad press for a product that will never compete with FaceBook, I wonder if Microsoft will similarly accept that Bing will never compete seriously with Google. Different markets, I know. Bing vs Google doesn't have to deal with the network effects of 'everybody's already on Facebook'.

      VERY different markets. Bing's search technology is getting expanded on and used within Office/Azure tenancies. I think MS announced something about this at Ignite last month. I see Bing as more of a tech experiment than an actual Google rival. Maybe MS captures a share of the search engine market, but I think their real aim was to learn how to build a better search engine, one that they could use elsewhere.

    4. Re:Microsoft has changed by Rob+Y. · · Score: 1

      VERY different markets. Bing's search technology is getting expanded on and used within Office/Azure tenancies. I think MS announced something about this at Ignite last month. I see Bing as more of a tech experiment than an actual Google rival. Maybe MS captures a share of the search engine market, but I think their real aim was to learn how to build a better search engine, one that they could use elsewhere.

      Perhaps, but that's a recent (at least since Bing failed in its initial obvious attempt to compete with Google) development. But hey, you could say the same thing about Google Plus. Yes, it's a very different market, but Google kept it around... why? Because it was a testbed for other social-ish things Google wanted to try? Because it was already written and cheap enough to keep alive? Because it had some users that liked it better than Facebook? Because it worked better for some things than Facebook?

      But I guess what you're saying is Microsoft did eventually come up with a viable Plan B for Bing - and Google never did (or tried to) for Google Plus...

      --
      Posted from my Android phone. Oh, I can change this? There, that's better...
    5. Re:Microsoft has changed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They still own the Windows platform, and in order to keep it 'cheap' enough to continue to compete with ChromeOS, MacOS and yes, Linux - while still monetizing it, they're gonna spy on you and hope that enough users keep Bing as the default search engine for them to make money selling ads there.

      Then why isn't Windows 10 cost-free? Why aren't they compensating the customers who do all of this unpaid labour to make their company more successful? Sorry, they don't get to have their cake and eat it too.

      The reason they spy on users is lack of respect for people, lack of respect for privacy/security and pure greed.

  13. membership is likely revocable by 4wdloop · · Score: 2

    ...so what happens to all tech that now depended on them? There must be some future protection, right? How does it work?

    --
    4wdloop
    1. Re:membership is likely revocable by Bobfrankly1 · · Score: 1

      ...so what happens to all tech that now depended on them? There must be some future protection, right? How does it work?

      Patent sharing doesn't mean all the code built on the patents becomes open source. They'll still keep that source code closed.

  14. The Business Environment has changed by PineHall · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I agree with what you are saying, however I think the business environment has changed, not so much Microsoft. Microsoft has always been about maximizing profits. Twenty years ago they were the big 800 lb gorilla. They did what they wanted to make more money. Today they are competing in a field of equals and they are trying to remain relevant with the new computing paradigms. So now they have to behave nicely to maximize profits. They decided that joining OIN was worth more than the royalties they would have collected from OIN members. I believe they will still try to collect royalties from non-OIN companies. It is all about the money.

    1. Re:The Business Environment has changed by Rob+Y. · · Score: 1

      What's to prevent Samsung, Asus, and the rest of the companies paying MS to use Android from joining the OIN themselves?

      --
      Posted from my Android phone. Oh, I can change this? There, that's better...
    2. Re:The Business Environment has changed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Asus would be prevented from joining by already being in ;) See https://www.openinventionnetwork.com/community-of-licensees/
      Joke aside, what prevents them is that they couldn't enforce their patents against core Linux technology anymore, which some might not like.

    3. Re:The Business Environment has changed by Bobfrankly1 · · Score: 1

      Nothing outside of any patents they want to keep to themselves.

    4. Re: The Business Environment has changed by dHagger · · Score: 1

      I agree with you that their actions in most cases has a busines decision behind them. I still believe Microsoft has changed during the last few years though - embracing open source in the way they have is only one of many possible ways they could have moved forward after Ballmer. Even though their open source commitment might look like a few token projects to consumers, when you start looking at their enterprise poducts you realise it goes a lot deeper than that. Like that they use git for the Windows source code, their container strategy is based on Docker, you can run SQL server on Docker and the official images are based on Linux - even when they could have chosen Windows! And seeing Microsoft employees - even in management positions - with an Apple computer is not uncommon anymore. So yes, they are only following what is best for their busines - but I think we should be happy that they have decided on the path where Open Source is seen as a good thing instead of continuing on the path that Ballmer set up.

    5. Re:The Business Environment has changed by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Today they are competing in a field of equals and they are trying to remain relevant with the new computing paradigms.

      That's a bit much. None of the competitors have an operating system that will run everyone's crappy applications.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  15. Can I join? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Can anyone join or do you have you be a rich business? Most of these open initiatives , including IEEE/JEDEC standards are not at all open unless you have deep pockets

  16. Sure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You don't understand because you fail to take into account new evidence. That is your weakness and your undoing.

  17. Corporate Hostile Takeover of Open Source WIP. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Corporate hostile takeover of Open Source work in progress.

  18. Microsoft says "innovation" drinking game by epine · · Score: 1

    Erich Andersen: "Microsoft sees open source as a key innovation engine, and for the past several years we have increased our contributions to the open source community.

    And half the time I say back (one has to pause to breath):

    Microsoft uses the word "innovation" because so many people are conditioned to assume it means "technical innovation" whereas (during the 1990s, especially) Microsoft was mainly good at business method innovation subtype: limiting their competitor's air supply through rampant violations of trade law, where enforcement never caught up in time to make a true difference.

  19. Or... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... these companies could just lobby for patent law to exclude software.

    Of course, that means you can't be a cartel with patents to put down industry disrupting start-ups.

  20. The 'Big Win' on this one by jmcwork · · Score: 1

    Everyone now has access to "Clippy"!

  21. It's all clickbait by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    https://azure.microsoft.com/en-us/blog/microsoft-joins-open-invention-network-to-help-protect-linux-and-open-source/

    The only statement related to the amount of patents is near the end and is as follows:

    "We bring a valuable and deep portfolio of over 60,000 issued patents to OIN'.
    -Erich Andersen, Corporate Vice President, Deputy General Counsel

    I believe the exact amount of patents still has yet to be agreed. I mean.. I can bring a wallet full of money to my local store but only pay for a pack of gum right?

  22. Linux and ExFat? by jonwil · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Does this mean Linux can now support ExFat? (the new file system that replaced Fat32 as standard for things like memory cards)

    1. Re:Linux and ExFat? by Bite+The+Pillow · · Score: 1

      Suse can. Other distros that have an owning body joined to OIN can.

      Linux as a whole has not joined. It they have, I'm wrong and they can.

  23. embrace, extend, extinguish by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Step 2 is certainly ramping up full speed, let's see how long before phase three begins.

    1. Re:embrace, extend, extinguish by halivar · · Score: 1

      Well, it's been 20 years so far, so....

  24. OINK by mentil · · Score: 1

    the Open Invention Network (OIN),

    Shouldn't that be the Open Invention NetworK (OINK)?

    --
    Corruption is convincing someone that the selfless ideal is the same as their selfish ideal.
    1. Re:OINK by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No.

  25. It's because Windows Update is shoddy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hospitals might still be using Windows XP, and Windows Update there is so shoddy, that it refuses to work because of some "database corruption" on the (software) client end. Microsoft is simply unable to re-architect Windows Update for Windows XP, so that both the updates database and the update logic would be robust.

    1. Re:It's because Windows Update is shoddy by Bobfrankly1 · · Score: 1

      You're acting like XP is some weird outlier. How about if they were on Ubuntu 4, Red Hat 2, or CentOS 3 instead? All of which were released 3-4 years after XP. The vendors for those operating systems don't support those anymore either. They'd tell you to update, and failure to update is completely on you. No wonder you posted as AC.

  26. ReactOS originates from Russia, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... and is supported by the Russian government, so I will not ever put any of my eggs in that basket.

  27. It's time for MS Office community version by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Despite these publicity stunts I do not see Microsoft anywhere close to FSF at least for another decade.

  28. Microsoft has not changed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Buying Github and acting patent friendly are theater.

    Give us a REAL instance of them legitimately changing anything that benefits society and not just themselves. There is no corporate social responsibility anywhere in that company.

  29. Who needs who? by lager_monste · · Score: 1

    Microsoft needs Linux.
    Does Linux need Microsoft?

  30. No more value by sad_ · · Score: 1

    Simple, all these patents have served their purpose, everybody already paid up. All the Android vendors & others like TomTom etc etc.
    There was no more money to be made from these patents, and so making them 'free' was the only things left to do.
    Bonus points for looking like a bad-ass company; the NEW Microsoft.

    --
    On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero.