Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Ballmer Says Linux "Infringes Our Intellectual Property"

Posted by Zonk on Fri Nov 17, 2006 08:38 AM
from the oh-it-is-so-on-now dept.
Stony Stevenson writes "In comments confirming the open-source community's suspicions, Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer Thursday declared his belief that the Linux operating system infringes on Microsoft's intellectual property." From the ComputerWorld article: "In a question-and-answer session after his keynote speech at the Professional Association for SQL Server (PASS) conference in Seattle, Ballmer said Microsoft was motivated to sign a deal with SUSE Linux distributor Novell earlier this month because Linux 'uses our intellectual property' and Microsoft wanted to 'get the appropriate economic return for our shareholders from our innovation.'" His exact wording is available at the Seattle Intelligencer, which has a transcript of the interview. Groklaw had an article up Wednesday giving some perspective on the Novell/Microsoft deal. Guess we'll have something to talk about in 2007, huh?
+ -
story

Related Stories

[+] Microsoft To Announce Linux Partnership 534 comments
Carl Bialik from WSJ writes "Microsoft is entering into an unusual partnership with Novell that gives a boost to Linux, people familiar with the companies tell WSJ.com. From the article: 'Under the pact, which isn't final, Microsoft will offer sales support of Suse Linux, a version of the operating system sold by Novell. The two companies have also agreed to develop technologies to make it easier for users to run both Suse Linux and Microsoft's Windows on their computers. The two companies are expected to announce details of their plan today at a press conference in San Francisco. In addition, Microsoft won't assert rights over patents over software technology that may be incorporated into Suse Linux, the people said. Businesses that use Linux have long worried that Microsoft would one day file patent infringement suits against sellers of the rival software.'"
[+] Is the Microsoft/Novell Deal a Litigation Bomb? 342 comments
mpapet writes "According to WINE developer Tom Wickline, the Microsoft/Novell deal for Suse support may one day control commercial customers' use of Free Software. Is this the end of commercial OSS developers who are not a part of the Microsoft/Suse pact?" From the article: "Wickline said that the pact means that there will now be a Microsoft-blessed path for such people to make use of Open Source ... 'A logical next move for Microsoft could be to crack down on 'unlicensed Linux' and 'unlicensed Free Software,' now that it can tell the courts that there is a Microsoft-licensed path. Or they can just passively let that threat stay there as a deterrent to anyone who would use Open Source without going through the Microsoft-approved Novell path,' Wickline said." Bruce Perens dropped a line to point out that most of the content actually comes from his post.
[+] Microsoft/Novell Deal Could Create Two-Tier Linux Market 375 comments
Rob writes writes to mention a Computer Business Review article about the recent Microsoft/Novell Linux deal. Article author Matthew Aslet warns that while some may see the announcement as a step forward, it may ultimately be very divisive for the Linux community. From the article: "Microsoft made it clear that only SUSE users and developers, as well as unsalaried Linux developers, are protected. 'Let me be clear about one thing, we don't license our intellectual property to Linux because of the way Linux licensing GPL framework works, that's not really a possibility,' said Microsoft chief executive, Steve Ballmer. 'Novell is actually just a proxy for its customers, and it's only for its customers,' he added. 'This does not apply to any forms of Linux other than Novell's SUSE Linux. And if people want to have peace and interoperability, they'll look at Novell's SUSE Linux. If they make other choices, they have all of the compliance and intellectual property issues that are associated with that.'"
[+] Novell Gets $348 Million From Microsoft 308 comments
An anonymous reader writes, "Novell has published additional details about its agreements with Microsoft concerning Windows and Linux interoperability and patents. It seems the company is receiving an up-front payment of $348 million from Microsoft, for SLES subscription certificates and for patent cross-licensing. Microsoft will make an upfront payment to Novell of $240 million for SLES subscription 'certificates' that Microsoft can use, resell, or distribute over the term of the agreement. Regarding the patent cooperation agreement, Microsoft will make an up-front net payment to Novell of $108 million, and Novell will make ongoing payments totaling at least $40 million over five years to Microsoft."
[+] Dvorak On Microsoft/Novell Deal 218 comments
zaxios writes, "John C. Dvorak has weighed in on the recent Novell-Microsoft pact. Among his insights: 'Microsoft has been leery of doing too much with Linux because of all the weirdness with the licenses and the possibility that one false move would make a Microsoft product public domain at worst, or subject to the GPL at best.' But now, 'the idea is to create some sort of code that is jammed into Linux and whose sole purpose is to let some proprietary code run under Linux without actually "touching" Linux in any way that would subject the proprietary code to the GPL.' According to Dvorak, it's only a matter of time before Linux is 'cracked' by Microsoft, meaning Microsoft figures out a way to run proprietary code on it."
[+] A 5-Year Deal With Microsoft To Dump Novell/SUSE 174 comments
Nicholas Petreley writes, "Wake up little SUSE, wake up. No, that's not good enough. Wake up SUSE customers, wake up. Novell is jeopardizing the future of Linux for its own short-term rewards. If you want to see Linux flourish, let alone survive, after Novell's five year deal with Microsoft expires, I suggest we make an alternative five-year deal with Microsoft. In this case, our part of the deal is to spend the next five minutes, months, or years migrating away from every shred of Novell/SUSE software in our home, office, or enterprise."
[+] Your Rights Online: Mr. Ballmer, Show Us the Code 462 comments
DigDuality writes "A new campaign, Showusthecode.com, requests every leader in the Linux world, and companies invested in Linux, to stand up and demand that Steve Ballmer show the world where Linux violates Microsoft's intellectual property. He has been making these claims since the Novell-Microsoft deal. If Microsoft answers this challenge — by May 1st — then Linux developers will be able to modify the code so that it remains 'free' software. If such infringing code doesn't exist, we will have called Microsoft's bluff. And if the campaign garners enough attention and if Steve Ballmer maintains silence, then the community and companies behind Linux can take the silence for the admission that it is."
[+] Novell "Forking" OpenOffice.org 370 comments
l2718 writes to mention that In the wake of their recent deal with Microsoft, Novell has announced a new version of OpenOffice.org which will support Microsoft's planned Office formal, Open XML. From the article: "The translators will be made available as plug-ins to Novell's OpenOffice.org product. Novell will release the code to integrate the Open XML format into its product as open source and submit it for inclusion in the OpenOffice.org project. As a result, end users will be able to more easily share files between Microsoft Office and OpenOffice.org, as documents will better maintain consistent formats, formulas and style templates across the two office productivity suites."
[+] Microsoft Taking Heat For Patent Stance 226 comments
Yesterday Novell released a statement disavowing Steve Ballmer's claim that Linux infringes Microsoft's IP. Linux-watch.com reports that Microsoft quickly responded with a statement of its own that softened, but did not entirely back away from, Ballmer's claim (but the article offers no link to such a statement). xtaski writes, "Everyone took notice when Ballmer spewed forth FUD about Microsoft and Linux IP. Now CIOs are asking just what did Ballmer think he was doing? They are not fooled — but rather, a little angry. ComputerWorld covers the news including one CIO who says 'There were some applications I had been thinking about moving to a Microsoft platform, but this has now totally alienated me from Microsoft.'" And an anonymous reader points us to the statement by the Open Invention Network — whose investors include IBM, Novell, Sony, Red Hat, Philips and NEC — on the Microsoft-Novell agreement. From the statement: "OIN continues to support the Linux community's ability to collaborate and innovate. Through the accumulation of patents that may be used to shield the Linux environment, including users of Linux software, OIN has obviated the need for offers of protection from others."
[+] Novell Responds To Microsoft's IP Claims 317 comments
Azul writes "Ron Hovsepian, Novell's CEO, has posted an open letter to the Community, where he explicitly states Novell's disagreement with Steve Ballmer's claims of Linux infringing on Microsoft's intellectual property. From the letter: 'We disagree with the recent statements made by Microsoft on the topic of Linux and patents. Importantly, our agreement with Microsoft is in no way an acknowledgment that Linux infringes upon any Microsoft intellectual property. When we entered the patent cooperation agreement with Microsoft, Novell did not agree or admit that Linux or any other Novell offering violates Microsoft patents.'"
[+] Eben Moglen To Scrutinize Novell-Microsoft Deal 102 comments
An anonymous reader writes "Novell is providing Eben Moglen's Software Freedom Law Center with confidential access to the legal terms of the Novell-Microsoft partnership, allowing to organization to verify if the deal is compatible with the GPL2 and GPL3 licenses. Moglen in the past has alleged that the patent license between the two companies could be in violation with section 7 of the GPL. Novell on Tuesday published a document on its website, explaining that they circumvented the GPL provisions by providing a patent license to the end user rather than between the two companies."
[+] Technology: Windows Server Trusts Samba4 Active Directory 182 comments
Darren Ginter writes "A group of Samba v4 developers recently spent a week in Redmond to work with Microsoft on Active Directory interoperability(?!). The result? Windows Server will now join, trust and replicate a Samba-based Active Directory using Microsoft-native protocols. Although Samba v4 is still in the alpha stages, this is a huge step for open source. Or it could be a trap."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • by LiquidCoooled (634315) on Friday November 17 2006, @08:39AM (#16882772) Homepage Journal
    Who merged the Linux Genuine Advantage code into the tree?
    Come on, speak up - I know it was one of you.
    • by 91degrees (207121) on Friday November 17 2006, @08:42AM (#16882820) Journal
      Sorry. That was me. I also added the module that executes arbitrary code downloaded by a network application, and the code that requires root access for trivial applications. Did I do something wrong?
    • by sfled (231432) <sfled@@@yahoo...com> on Friday November 17 2006, @09:09AM (#16883146) Homepage Journal
      Steve Ballmer
      Microsoft Corp.
      Redmond, WA

      Dear Mr. Ballmer,

      I am forwarding my old SuSE 8.1 Pro CDs & DVD to you, along with appropriate instruction on where you can put them (including facilitation of the process with a sharpened poker.)

      Regards,

      Sfled
    • Re:Alright, own up (Score:5, Interesting)

      by concept10 (877921) on Friday November 17 2006, @10:05AM (#16883952) Homepage
      Alright, enough joking. Enough of the Balmer, chair and DRM jokes. It's time for industry leaders such as IBM, Intel and other supporters of F/OSS to step up to the plate and take action against these claims. Also, I haven't heard nothing from the likes of Linus and RMS. Where are they hiding?
    • Re:Alright, own up (Score:5, Insightful)

      by canuck57 (662392) on Friday November 17 2006, @10:19AM (#16884172)

      Who merged the Linux Genuine Advantage code into the tree? Come on, speak up - I know it was one of you.

      Funny, but the wrong thing to ask.

      The right thing to ask is how much open and public domain source made it to Windows? Was not Linux preemptive multitasking before Windows, POP3, SMTP/sendmail, DNS/BIND, Kerberos, telnet, ftp, http, ssl, TCP/IP itself, and probably more. At least in concept everything in Windows even windows itself is borrowed from other peoples works. Windows itself is an extrapolation of other people's prior works at best.

  • Samba (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Ice Wewe (936718) on Friday November 17 2006, @08:40AM (#16882784)
    This coming from the guy that's requiring SMB2 in Vista so that people using Samba on Linux server's can't use them for file storage.
    • Re:Samba (Score:5, Interesting)

      by udderly (890305) * on Friday November 17 2006, @09:00AM (#16883014)
      Is it just me or does it sound like MS is going to charge a per seat charge for some enhanced ability to connect from a Windows machine to Linux servers? Or is it just straight blackmail for exemption for future litigation? Or both? I can't tell.
      • Re:Samba (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Jason Earl (1894) on Friday November 17 2006, @10:19AM (#16884166) Homepage

        Actually, Microsoft's plan is even stupider than that. Microsoft wants to charge a per seat license for Linux users, but they aren't really offering enhanced interoperability. Novell and Red Hat are both going to include the same software. It's not like Novell is going to have its own version of Samba, for instance. The primary difference is that Novell customers are going to be able to "sleep easy" because Novell is paying Microsoft so that Microsoft won't sue Novell's Linux customers.

        Microsoft isn't going to sue Red Hat's customers either, but that's only because suing Red Hat customers would be ridiculously foolish. At its heart the real issue is that Microsoft has such a poor relationship with its customers that many customers are worried that Microsoft will drag them into patent court. These customers are willing to pay money, not for any sort of patent license, but for a short term commitment from Microsoft that they won't be sued.

        Next thing you know Microsoft execs will be brutalizing school kids for their lunch money.

        The truly ironic bit is that Microsoft is not going to sue anyone over patents. Microsoft execs know that if they did this the various organizations that have a stake in the success of Linux (which is essentially everyone but Microsoft) would pay for a well-funded defense. Millions of dollars would be spent, and in the end the patents in question would either be shot down or removed from the Free Software product in question. Depending on who Microsoft chose to attack it could even trigger retaliation from other large players with huge patent repositories. What's more, Microsoft's patent aggression would start a wholesale migration away from Microsoft's technologies.

        If Microsoft started suing folks using its technology then its technology would become much less popular virtually overnight.

        This is why Microsoft has wisely chosen a middle road. Instead of actually taking people to court, it is simply going to threaten to take people to court and hope that they'll throw money Microsoft's way.

  • by deadhammer (576762) on Friday November 17 2006, @08:40AM (#16882788)
    That rhythmic thudding sound you hear is the sound of every computer professional on the planet simultaneously laughing their balls off.
  • by eldavojohn (898314) * <my/.username@@@gmail.com> on Friday November 17 2006, @08:40AM (#16882790) Homepage Journal
    "Novell pays us some money for the right to tell customers that anybody who uses SUSE Linux is appropriately covered," Ballmer said. This "is important to us, because [otherwise] we believe every Linux customer basically has an undisclosed balance-sheet liability."
    Do me a favor, disclose your 'undisclosed balance-sheet liability' and then we'll listen to you bitch about Linux.

    I haven't seen patent one infringed upon let alone a whole balance sheet's worth so you'll have to excuse me if I seem a bit pessimistic about you strong arming me into using SuSE.

    That's right, you can spin it anyway you want ... but what I see is that Novell just lost all their street cred by selling out to you. What they sold was their future in the open source community. Why do I have this strange view of it all? Well, because I have this sinking feeling that a year or two from now you're going to package some form of Linux (maybe with Windows maybe separately) and you aren't going to release the source code & you're going to earn a profit on supporting it. And people will be pissed and there will be a court case. But you'll hire a thousand and one lawyers and they'll show up and they'll point out to the judge that Linux kernel "infringed upon Windows anyway" and the deal you made with Novell only confirmed it and admitted that they were facing lawsuits from you. The whole time, there won't be any patents cited, no logic will be used but at the end of the day the judge, bless his computer ignorance, will probably agree with you and allow you to continue to release & profit from Linux. But that won't be enough, you'll go after ever user using non-Microsoft-mutated-SuSE Linux and sue every other Linux distro. If that's not your motive, why are you already issuing warnings to users of other distros?

    It's not just any old regular FUD, it's new improved Microsoft FUD.

    Enjoy your $500 million, Novell.
    • by Epeeist (2682) on Friday November 17 2006, @08:50AM (#16882898) Homepage
      > but what I see is that Novell just lost all their street cred by selling out to you.

      I agree with you, but I think it is worse than that. I think the deal changes the perception of Linux, which is what the point of it was all the time.
    • by A nonymous Coward (7548) * on Friday November 17 2006, @08:52AM (#16882924)
      the judge, bless his computer ignorance, will probably agree with you and allow you to continue to release & profit from Linux.

      I don't believe they will have any more success than SCO has had. Microsoft's biggest mistake is not understanding how well the GPL resonates with developers and how poorly DRM resonates with users. They are stuck with a DOS mindset.

      Their second biggest mistakes was proxying SCO to do their dirty work. The SCO case has shown how poorly this infringement idea flies [wikipedia.org], and it is going to make it incredibly hard for Microsoft to get any traction with the general public and with Wall Street when they take their turn. The legal traction won't be there either, but they can afford far more lawyering than SCO and will manage to drag out Son of SCO for a long time. But the end result will be even better for Linux.
      • by jackbird (721605) on Friday November 17 2006, @09:03AM (#16883050)
        Bear in mind that Boies Schiller Flexner, SCO's law firm, is really, really good. They're the firm that defeated Microsoft in the antitrust trial. The fact that they've been able to drag this case out as long as they have with no evidence whatsoever is testament to that.

        But IBM has some fantastic lawyers as well, and they are not going to take Microsoft intimidating and/or suing their customers lying down. The nightmare scenario is IBM, MS, and Novell collaborating on a plan to monetize Linux, but with Red Hat already having line in the sand, and Sun and most of the developers unlikely to play ball, that could end well, too.

    • by 14CharUsername (972311) on Friday November 17 2006, @09:09AM (#16883140)
      This deal won't have any influence on the courts. Its all about PR and thats as far as it goes. And everyone in the know knows how this is complete bullshit. If Linux is infringing on MS patents, then why is MS paying Novell, a linux distributer? Shouldn't Novell be paying MS? What is MS paying for? FUD, thats what. But FUD doesn't work in courts. FUD is about muddying the waters and the law is all about very specific little details.
    • by MindStalker (22827) <jlarsen.fsu@edu> on Friday November 17 2006, @09:10AM (#16883158) Journal
      It seems they are referring to the interoperability features. Things like NTFS support and even Samba. Of course as we speak the EU is forcing MS to disclose these interoperability secrets and saying they don't belong to MS. A lot of this stuff was also covered in the initial trial here in the US. They got let off, but the political climate is changing. They might be figuring, hey we need to license this stuff quickly before the government forces us to give it away..
    • by msobkow (48369) on Friday November 17 2006, @09:11AM (#16883160) Journal

      What is it about monopolists that they end up thinking no one else could possibly be as good as them and their team, that no one could possibly compete, that no one could come up with an idea on their own?

      Why do monopolists assume they own the world when their fragment is a paltry slice compared to the whole?

      Why would someone whose anti-trust investigation mysteriously evaporated shortly after the Bush election be flapping their gums when the Democrats are on the rise and looking into any and all events for influence, connections, and blame? Instead of worrying about Linux, Ballmer should be worrying about the spectre of renewed anti-trust investigations.

      The Linux code is up for public review. The straw-dog SCO attempt to tear it down is all but done. Let Microsoft publish their code and identify the purported IP conflicts. They don't and won't because they can't, and they know it.

    • by spellraiser (764337) on Friday November 17 2006, @09:11AM (#16883168) Journal

      Also from Ballmer:

      We are willing to do the same deal with Red Hat and other Linux distributors, it's not an exclusive thing.

      My, how nice of you. So you're willing to include others in your protection racket? You're much too gracious.

      Seriously, this is f*cked up, in a disturbingly devious way. Basically, Ballmer's philosophy here seems to be: "Microsoft deserves money for every single computer out there, and we will get it one way or the other."

  • by SlashDread (38969) on Friday November 17 2006, @08:41AM (#16882792)
    SuSE is dead.
  • by tttonyyy (726776) on Friday November 17 2006, @08:41AM (#16882800) Homepage Journal
    Microsoft infringes on our patience sometimes, as well.
  • by A nonymous Coward (7548) * on Friday November 17 2006, @08:42AM (#16882812)
    If you want a job done right, do it yourself, eh Balmer? SCO just wasn't up to the task.
  • by MancunianMaskMan (701642) on Friday November 17 2006, @08:44AM (#16882840)
    GNU/Linux infringes on our IP
  • Okay... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by urbanradar (1001140) <timothyfielding@nospAM.gmail.com> on Friday November 17 2006, @08:45AM (#16882852) Homepage
    Pretty much any Linux geek will tell you that's a load of jibberish, not unlike the SCO case. But, should it come to Microsoft and Novell going to court over this, couldn't this still spell trouble for Novell? A lengthy trial isn't cheap (and neither are out-of-court settlements). And the worst case scenario - maybe this could even spell trouble for Linux itself? It certainly makes for some excellent FUD for Microsoft to feed to the CIOs and managers of the world.

    With Microsoft's track history, I wonder why people trust them at all. Especially when the stakes are high, like in this situation.
    • Re:Okay... (Score:5, Interesting)

      by walt-sjc (145127) on Friday November 17 2006, @08:57AM (#16882974)
      Oh, I believe that Linux (especially when you look at an entire distribution) DOES infringe on some MS patents. Wasn't it a year or so ago where 20 some odd MS patents were dug up by Linux proponents as a concern?

      I think a couple of things have been holding MS back however. IBM and THEIR patent war-chest, and the EU / DOJ with the anti-trust / abusive monopoly issue.

      MS wouldn't go after individuals in any case, they would go after businesses.

      We shall see!
      • Re:Okay... (Score:5, Interesting)

        by Anonymous Coward on Friday November 17 2006, @09:22AM (#16883294)
        Well said. It's likely that every non-trivial piece of software infringes on some patent somewhere. But there are two reasons nobody wants a patent war:
        • It would be carnage. The only certain outcome would be lawyers getting rich.
        • Software patents are still disallowed in Europe, but there is intense lobbying to get them introduced. A US software patent war would show what a disaster they are.
    • Re:Okay... (Score:5, Funny)

      by chrismcdirty (677039) on Friday November 17 2006, @08:58AM (#16882978) Homepage
      So what I'm gathering from this is that it's going to be a behemoth of a battle between IBM and MS, with hopefully many lawyers dying in the middle.
    • Re:Okay... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by miyako (632510) <miyako@@@gmail...com> on Friday November 17 2006, @09:01AM (#16883040) Homepage Journal
      I think this will certainly spell trouble for Linux. Not "the end of Linux" - but certainly trouble. Mostly it comes down to the fact that, when MS gets around to sueing people, some retarded judge is going to look at Novell signing a deal with MS as "admission of guilt" and - while it might not win the case for MS - it will lend a lot more creadance to their FUD for a lot of people.
      As for Novell, I don't think Microsoft will take them to court, but I don't think they need to. I don't really know of anyone who was supportive of the Novell/Microsoft deal- and very few were even willing to give them the benefit of the doubt. This whole thing is going to really deamonize Novell in the eyes of the open source community. The way I see it, and a lot of other people too, is that basically Novell had the idea that Microsoft was going to start suing people over Linux, and rather than stand up for Linux and the community, they decided to become another MS lapdog.
  • SCO did it! (Score:5, Interesting)

    by hackstraw (262471) * on Friday November 17 2006, @08:47AM (#16882864) Homepage

    But seriously, when the first SCO thing came about, the Linux people said, "We don't want to infringe on anyone's IP, so tell us where it we are infringing, and we will rewrite the code."

    Same applies here. Open source takes a little of the fun out of these things, now doesn't it?

    • Re:SCO did it! (Score:5, Insightful)

      by miyako (632510) <miyako@@@gmail...com> on Friday November 17 2006, @09:15AM (#16883206) Homepage Journal
      I think the difference will be that SCO was claiming their actual code was in the kernel, while MS is claiming that it "infringes on their IP".
      For all we know MS has some patent on Operating Systems or taking input, processing it, and giving output, or the color blue, or something.
      That's the problem with software patents, as it stands right now, if Linux really is infringing on some MS patent then the functionality will have to be removed, not simply re-implemented in a different way. If this patent is on something core to the operation of Linux, then it could be very bad.
      Frankly, I wouldn't be surprised if Linux does violate some MS patent- not because the kernel developers have been stealing from MS, but because software patents are far to broad in nature. The best possible scenario would be that Linux is violating some MS patents and that is used as a stepping stone in order to reorganize that entire software patent system so it's not so stupid. More likely is that either Linux isn't violating any MS patents, or it is but MS doesn't do anything about it in court because they are afraid of having to fight IBM on one side, and Antitrust lawsuits from the EU (and possibly the US, though we saw how effective that was the last time) on another side.
  • Put up or Shut up (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Cadallin (863437) on Friday November 17 2006, @08:51AM (#16882906)
    Alright, enough of this bullshit. Isn't there some kind of Libel suit that can be filed about this kind of garbage? I know I, as a private citizen can't go around telling newspapers that the Coca-Cola company kills a kitten for every can of drink they sell, without getting sued nine ways from breakfast. Why is Microsoft any different? If they've got something, let's see it, if not, can't they be forced to stop spreading FUD on pain big nasty fine-y death? Surely Redhat, and the other corporate Linux entities have some interest in trying this?
  • BSD too (Score:5, Funny)

    by Lord_Slepnir (585350) on Friday November 17 2006, @08:53AM (#16882926) Journal
    Ballmer added later in the speech "You'll notice that BSD also infringes on our Intellectual Property. You'll notice that the BSD network stack is identical to the one Microsoft created. Anyone who thinks otherwise has been brainwashed by the Great Satan [freebsd.org]"
  • So what happens (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Epeeist (2682) on Friday November 17 2006, @08:53AM (#16882928) Homepage
    When it is shown to be Mono that is infringing?
  • by quiberon2 (986274) on Friday November 17 2006, @08:56AM (#16882964)
    Microsoft need to be specific; what are the patent numbers, which countries are they valid in, and what is the licence fee that Microsoft would like from an individual user ?

    Without that essential information, Microsoft are behaving in a commercially-inappropriate way. Intimidating and destructive to creativity.

    I need the chance to way either that the patent does not apply where I live; or that there is prior art; or that I will do something in a different way. Or to find a patent of mine (or of my employer's) that they would like to cross-licence. I also need to know when the patent expires.

  • by hedrick (701605) on Friday November 17 2006, @09:00AM (#16883008)
    With this license agreement, Novell has a license to put MS patented technology into their Linux. Is it safe to permit Novell engineers to submit code to common Linux repositories? It seems to me that they would need to certify that none of their code contains any of the MS IP that they now have access to. Unless MS is willing to identify which portions of SuSE are covered by their patents, this could be difficult.
  • The coming war (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday November 17 2006, @09:03AM (#16883058)
    It all makes sense - MS is starting to worry. Not about the "boom in linux in just a few years" - that has been "just a few years" for over a decade now. What they are worried about is the "Big War" on the very immediate horizon. Computing is about to undergo a huge revolution.

    Now that (as far as a lot of the top end guys at MS are concerned) Vista is out of the door they are looking at what is next. Customers (home, but most especially business) are not going to pay for another OS - many might not even buy Vista. There is little else MS can put into an OS that sells - stability and modularisation don't sell. They tried the "eye candy" route for Vista - because if they didn't it wouldn't sell one copy. The thing is they can't do the same thing again "Windows Corumo - just another coat of paint on the same OS" - nobody will buy it.

    The future? Subscription based economics - they don't have to produce another OS - they just continually charge for the current one. That too goes for MS Office etc.

    Why the current turn by MS - because linux really does cause them difficulties in that business model. $30 per month for windows or $0 for a flavour of linux.

    The big battle is ahead - the business model that has held firm with computers (both software and hardware) over the past 20 years is being broken up. This can be proven in the easiest way imaginable. Ask yourself this question. As a member of the "bulk" of computer users (ie not high end gamers or 3D designers - home "write an email and watch a dvd"'ers or business "write a spreadsheet or create a presentation"er's) - why would you *want* to buy a new machine/new OS? - the old one does everything just fine - super fast and relatively trouble free. That has not been the case for the past 20 years - it is now.
  • by spellraiser (764337) on Friday November 17 2006, @09:05AM (#16883084) Journal

    Quoth Ballmer:

    At the end of the day for basically the whole 18, 19 years that we've been pursuing the server and enterprise opportunity, our number one competitor in the data center for new applications has been Unix. Unix, Unix, Unix, Unix.

    So they need lots of developers, developers, developers, developers to keep up ...

  • by unity100 (970058) on Friday November 17 2006, @09:07AM (#16883112) Homepage Journal
    With the monopolist pressure they are forcing my relatives, my employers, my contractees, my government to use their own software and wont let them bail out, limiting me on what i can or cant do with my audio&visual equipment in my own house, increasingly deciding what i can or cannot see on the internet, oppressing my open source community, suing people to the extent of harrassment, causing my relatives, friends, close ones to get into pain over their lacking&incapable&insecure softare and me to run fix-up errands for them, trying to funnel cash into decision makers to influence political decisions against my democratic wishes.

    In short, they are using me and all the people i know for their own personal profit against their wishes.

    i request that microsoft cease and desist immediately
  • by Tarlus (1000874) on Friday November 17 2006, @09:13AM (#16883178)
    Hey, Steve, Apple of the 1980's called. They want their reactions to your OS stealing their ideas back.
  • by Dystopian Rebel (714995) * on Friday November 17 2006, @09:37AM (#16883494) Journal
    Really, he is a genius. Think about it.

    IT Shop: We need some robust 24/7 uptime servers.

    Ballmer: Great, I'll send you some Windows licences. Misa or VasterCard?

    IT Shop: No, we need a well-architected, secure OS that's designed for networking.

    Ballmer: Great! I'll send you some Vista licences. You should see Aero. Wow!

    IT Shop: No, in the last 10 years, Windows has cost billions of dollars in lost time because of security flaws in Microsoft software.

    Ballmer: Um... well... er... heh...

    IT Shop: We're going with Linux.

    Ballmer: Did you know? All the good parts of Linux were designed by us. Novell even admits it. We release so much great code every day that we let the hippies have some for free. So, in fact, when you buy Vista, you get all the good parts of Linux. Plus... you get Aero! Wow! Will that be Misa or VasterCard?

     
  • OSX question (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Overzeetop (214511) on Friday November 17 2006, @10:17AM (#16884128) Journal
    So, if there is "infringing" IP in Linux, is there a liklihood that similar infringements have been made in Apple's code?

    Really, I'm not trolling. It sounds like Ballmer is saying that MS has so much of the system tied up in IP that effectively everybody who writes an OS which can interact with MS software is infringing. Does Apple have cross licensing?
  • by walterbyrd (182728) on Friday November 17 2006, @10:21AM (#16884220)
    The lack of specificity is the most damaging. Clearly msft's game is to flood the media with vauge innuendo about linux being a legal mine field. A lie told often enough is the truth. If msft were specific, their claims could be evaluted and appropriate actions taken.

    Msft = the fud factory.
    • by Pink Tinkletini (978889) on Friday November 17 2006, @09:40AM (#16883544) Homepage
      The whole point of the BSD license is that the code may be used freely, by anyone, anywhere, for any purpose. BSD programmers care more about seeing their code put to good use than about getting something back in return. I'd just be happy to see my code being used to improve such a widely-used product, thereby improving the lives of millions. Much less likely with the GPL, you must admit.