Linspire/Microsoft Agreement Useless to Users

Stephen Samuel writes "Groklaw host PJ has dissected the 'patent peace' agreement between Linspire and Microsoft, and has determined that what Linspire agreed to is next to useless for many users. Essentially, under the agreement Linspire software is almost unusable: 'You can't share the software with others, pass it on with the patent promise, modify your own copy, or even use it for an "unauthorized" purpose, whatever that means in a software context. You must pay Linspire for the software, but then the "covenant" says to use Linux, you must also pay Microsoft. That payment doesn't cover upgrades. Linspire said it was absorbing the initial fees, but I don't know about upgrades. New functionality means you lose your coverage or presumably must pay again.'"

All I can say is...

Linspire should just expire.

Re:All I can say is...

Linspire have always targetted Windows switchers. They know full well that hardcore geeks would never use Linspire. The Linux community means nothing to them.

Ah well

Luckily there are 300 other distros to choose from :)

Re:Ah well

You can still get Linspire and do everything you always wanted.
It's just money you pay to Microsoft to keep them from trashing your store^W^W^Wsueing for patent infringement.

ESR

I'd like to know Eric Raymond's take on this. Isnt he on the linspire board or something?

Re:ESR

I'd like to know Eric Raymond's take on this.

As a matter of fact it's not necessary to wait for a public comment from ESR to know his views. If anything, these events can only reinforce his views that he wants "to see Microsoft broken on the wheel not by government fiat but by enlightened consumer choice". (Source: Halloween Documents FAQ [catb.org]

Isn't he on the linspire board or something?

According to this post [zdnet.com] apparantly by Linspire's CEO Eric is (or at least still was on Feb 23, 2007) "one of many un-paid volunteers of the Freespire [freespire.org] Leadership Board". I wouldn't be surprised if Eric reconsiders his involvement in that project in reaction to Linspire's agreement with Microsoft, but it's his choice of course.

Agreement useless to users?

Isn't it much more like Linspire/Microsoft Agreement makes Linspire useless? Additionally, that is an understatement also since the general idea of useless is that you won't get anything good from it. In this scenario, it should be Linspire/MS Agreement Toxic to Users.

Re:Agreement useless to users?

Isn't it much more like Linspire/Microsoft Agreement makes Linspire useless?

Darn! Bet MS never saw that coming!

Sidenote: Do any of these companies signing these agreements actually read them? Because so far most of the agreements seem to be designed to stop the Linux distributor from distributing Linux. Either that or there's some massive get-out clause in all of them which everybody else has missed.

Re:Agreement useless to users?

I don't think this agreement is relevant to users at all.

Basically, Microsoft says "we won't sue Linspire users as long as they only do X, Y and Z".

That doesn't mean in any way that anyone is preventing Linspire users from doing whatever they want. They can do A, B and C, just like Redhat users can. Microsoft just doesn't promise anymore not to sue them, just as it never promised not to sue Redhat customers. Which doesn't matter much, because Microsoft is just full of wind anyway.

Great business-plan

I think they have a great business-plan

1. Start a Linux distribution
2. Get Microsoft's attention
3. Get millions from Microsoft (more then they will ever earn selling it), agreeing to everything Microsoft ask.
4. Go out of business

I think more distributions should do it... (as long the really serious ones don't)

SCO Deja Vu

Microsoft's tactics in providing "patent agreements" remind me of the SCO days when they made an assumption that Linux "belongs" to them because of some vague "infringements". Based on this assumption, they start doing wonky things like charging $699 per seat for the right to use Linux, and other such nonsense.

MS is operating along the same lines. The assumption is that you owe Microsoft something for using Linux, hence the need for such agreements between MS and Linux vendors.

It's classic FUD, but I don't know if MS would actually sue anyone. Unlike SCO Microsoft has a bottomless pit of money, and yet MS may not be large enough to successfully try and destroy Linux via patent infringement lawsuits.

We'll see how it all plays out. Will Microsoft embarass themselves the same way SCO did? One thing's for sure, if Microsoft decides to play the patent game, they too are at risk of getting countersued for whatever patents they infringe (and based on how many software patents are out there, there's sure to be some).

Re:SCO Deja Vu

Linspire will be releasing some Microsoft tech like audio and video codecs along with some document formating stuff and a few other things in their releases.

Linspire says that for now they won't charge users for these things. They may charge for upgrades and maintenance releases of their Microsoft proprietized "click-and-run" (CNR) distributed packages. If a Linspire user doesn't pay any charges set by Linspire, or Linspire doesn't pay Microsoft even if the user pays Linspire, the user is not covered by the Microsoft pledge not to sue (and the agreement actually doesn't protect users anyway). When a Linspire user downloads a CNR package, Microsoft now will be able to track the users identity. If the user gets a Microsoft tainted CNR component, Microsoft can then demand the user allows Microsoft or their agent (BSA, perhaps?) to audit all their software. If the user refuses, Microsoft can sue them for infringement, aided by the CNR server records.

This deal is nowhere near as benign as you try and describe. Remember, this is a deal with Microsoft. If they can't find IP violations in a linux distribution, they'll put it there and then cry "victim".

Re:SCO Deja Vu

"It's classic FUD, but I don't know if MS would actually sue anyone. Unlike SCO Microsoft has a bottomless pit of money, and yet MS may not be large enough to successfully try and destroy Linux via patent infringement lawsuits."

I agree completely with you, except:

Linux datacenters (I run one), admins, and developers should be thanking their lucky stars for IBM. They and they alone have enough legal strength and money to scare Microsoft. But it gets better!

Wait and watch for the interesting times as the SCO/EVERYBODY lawsuits wind down.

Prediction: IBM sues Microsoft into the crapper once the SCO thing is resolved. At the end of the ten year lawsuit, Microsoft is irrelevant- but IBM have open sourced it's patent portfolio.

Then again... I am probably wrong and we'll be running Windows "Orbital View" and paying a penny a keystroke.

But one can hope.

SCO conspiracy theory

Who do you think started the SCO lawsuits?

SCO was a trial balloon for Microsoft. Though Microsoft's pipe fairy, SCO got a hot cash injection. They started making wild claims, which drove their stock up quite nicely, thank you.

Then they started suing, and everything went downhill. SCO discovered they actually had to *prove* something. So, we've been fortunate enough to witness a corporation spinning faster and faster until rotational velocity rips it apart. It's kinda cool.

Here's what Microsoft learned from SCO: *accusations work.* They work very, very well. Make vague, unsubstantiated claims. Oh, don't go as far as Darl McBride. He's an ass. Instead, insinuate. Make a few direct claims, let those claims disappear, then play on the doubt those claims left behind.

It's working surprisingly well. The one thing that's backfiring, though, is that Microsoft has associated their name with Linux, in a strange approving sort of way. This is PR that Linux couldn't buy. I have non-geek people asking me about Linux these days, people who'd never heard of it before.

Anyway, Microsoft will never take this to court. They would be complete fools to disregard the SCO effect.

really?

linspire isn't any good? I am no expert on that particular distro but I have always kinda assumed it was worthless. at the moment I am very happy with arch and intend to keep using it for quite a while. hopefully it is small enough to be under M$ radar. it also helps that it appears to not have a real for profit group at its head to sell our of our souls off for us.

Windux - the clean OS

I think they should have called Lindows a better name.. Windux. On second thought, the judge probably would have ruled that they have to wash all the windows at microsoft campus for infringing on trademarks twice.

Linspire's Claim to Fame?

Isn't Linspire's only claim to fame the fact that it was briefly bundled on ultra cheap PCs as a Windows substitute because of a look-a-like GUI? Did it have any technical merits over other Linux distributions that would make it worth mourning over?

At the end of the day you gotta ask:

Who owns *MY* computer? Me, or Microsoft?

Round the Twist

"Have you ever, ever felt like this / Strange things happen when your going 'round the twist"

Hit and Run.

Unlike most other Linux distributions, Linspire was conceived primarily as a business enterprise. Consider this a buyout, albeit one that harms affirms FUD affecting all other distributions. Also consider how the beating that Linspire has taken from MS in the past may affect their willingness to stand strong in the face of MS threats now - however vacuous.

While I won't miss Linspire I am interested to know the future of Robertson's only real valued contribution to the GNU/Linux family of operating systems - CNR [linspire.com]. Perhaps Shuttleworth should click-and-run with it while he still can (though Klikit [atekon.de] looks like a pretty good fallback).

Missing the point...

So I'm no Kreskin... but M$ has never been subtle about it's desire to pretty much play Mongul Horde all over the face of modern computing. I think this is clearly M$ pulling an old tried and true lan out of their own gamebook and simply reverting to business as usual. I'm guessing the plan will look something like;

• Swallow a few tiny Linux distros whole, and at least assimilate them sufficiently to make certain that they can sing and dance like another Borg Drone.
• Claim that they're just like all the other Linux players, except they have that fresh new minted by M$ smell, ummmmm can't you just smell it.
• Play to the businesses that have migrated to Linux, and say "Y'all can come back home now, we're ready to give you want you're craving."
• All the while embedding their own crap throughout these bastard Linux babies, copywriting and patenting new code and software functionality, and DRM, and spyware, and embedded bits of their toxic dreck throughout the distros.
• They'll try to lay claim to things that don't belong to them, but they'll plead they were just trying to cover their proprietary code, muddy up the copywrite water and try desperately to tie real innovation up in a rats nest of layers, so in 5 to 7 years when they release their next real OS, Linux will be sufficiently hamstrung so they have a chance to compete. Or I'm guessing that's at least their hope.
• In the meantime, they'll vascilate between pretending to play nice, making vague, obscure, or veiled threats, making strategic partnerships with folks who want to coexist peacably (with absolutely no intention of playing nice), and all the while looking for ways to slip a sharp instrument between the 5th and 6th rib of this upstart OS that has caused them so much grief.

Have I missed anything? Probably. Y'know, if they put aside this whole Genghis Kahn, I gotta own the whole freakin world mentality, and just started committing themselves to doing good things for humanity... the rest would take care of itself. Oh well. This is going to be an interesting show! Who's got the popcorn!

Linspire/Microsoft Agreement Useless to Users

Do we really need a slashdot story about this? I thought it was common knowledge that it was useless.

Does Linspire have any market share?

A week ago, there was this article which said Microsoft excludes GPL3 from the Linspire deal, and I wondered whether Linspire had any significant userbase in the US [slashdot.org]

That post got modded Interesting, but didn't get any replies, so I'm really not sure whether Linspire is alive in the corporate segment, which should be the segment that worries about patent suits... like SCO sued Daimler-Chryssler (?) and lost face.

I can't imagine a company like Linspire would inspire any confidence in knowledgable markets like in Asia... The manner in which they caved in during the Lindows trademark dispute with Microsoft was suspicious and intriguing as well.

At a guess, just how many customers does Linspire have, if any? A few hundreds? In which case, I think /. must simply ignore this deal and related news - it doesn't matter much.

lets make Linspire retire...

The agreement is contradictory to the GPL license.

The Agreement is null and void because of the contradiction with the license.

It should also be noted that Microsoft ... bill gates got his start by porting BASIC and then yelling piracy because he wasn't delivering in a reasonable amount of time.

Second was the sale of MSDOS to IBM but Microsoft did not, at the time of selling it to IBM, own it nor had they even contacted the creator if it.

Is this another example of MS profiting off of what they do not own or have a right to?

Of course it is and it shows what scum Microsoft really are.

Trying to use and agreement that invalidates a license while using libel against the software developer with claims of piracy - patent infrigment on what is by nature not patentable but itself "software patents" an act of fraud supported by the US government. And MS does not present any proof of what is supposedly infringed.

Really people, this is the essence of Microsoft. What they are doing should be pursued legally as it certainly is an intentional consumer deception at various levels.

MS is still attacking Open source software. Make no mistake between what they say and what they do.

So what?

Hopefully this will just put people off using Linspire, which is no big deal in the long term. Last I checked, Linspire was full of all manner of nasty closed-source shite which the world would be better off without. If the Debian developers aren't pissed off to the back teeth at the way some people (and not just Linspire) have bastardised their "100% i-tal forever" distro, they deserve sainthood in at least as many religions as there are platforms on which Debian runs.

Never forget, it was Linspire who provided a lot of the funding for Pidgin [pidgin.im] when it was called Gaim (which was so staunchly GPL that they didn't even make the usual OpenSSL exception; it was GNUTLS or no MSN), then -- as soon as they realised that the terms of the GPL meant they could never get the code all to themselves, cage it up and take away the Source Code -- left the developers right in the lurch with the AOL lawsuit.

Fortunately, the GPL prevailed; the developers were able to fork their own code and give it a new name, but it just goes to show how some people will double-cross you at the last minute.

Unusable?

Essentially, under the agreement Linspire software is almost unusable: 'You can't share the software with others, pass it on with the patent promise, modify your own copy, or even use it for an "unauthorized" purpose,

Wow, it's unusable. The only thing you can do is... use it. WTF?

New functionality means you lose your coverage or presumably must pay again.

New functionality presumably must pay again? How does a software upgrade pay a bill?

Who is Linspire?

No really. Who is Linspire to those of us that use Linux?

The people I know that Linux don't use Linspire. They use Suse, Red Hat & Fedora, Ubuntu, and a host of other distros. Most of us get downloads from Linux archives, release company's sites or distro sites. I've never seen Linspire on any of those.

I remember some rumblings about them being sold at Walmart but I have never seen a Linspire box at any of our Walmarts. I didn't even realize Linspire was still around.

So, do they even have any market share today? Anybody really use it? Hardly anybody uses it now and if this deal causes more people to shun them, will anybody even notice? Who is Linspire anyway?

What will happen to Linspire/Ubuntu partnership?

http://www.linspire.com/lindows_news_pressreleases _archives.php?id=213/ [linspire.com]
Ubuntu 7+ is supposed to be using Linspire's CNR technology (Is it?). How does the Linspire/MS agreement affect Ubuntu (since they have refused to sign anything wiht MS). Has anything happened in this scenario? I'm not aware of any. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

What were they thinking?

Linspire is no longer a Linux "Opensource" Product. Shame on them!

AHAH

PWNED

Re:Groklaw?? How about objective analysis instead?

How about objective analysis instead?

How about reading the article and point out some actual errors in it?
I did, and most points she makes seem valid to me...

What facts did you use for your objective analysis of groklaw?

You surely "get the facts"

Yeah, go and read M$ PR bulletins instead. The get the facts campaign is so about truth.

Ah! I think I see your problem.

A Microsoft contract limits what you can do with what they perceive to be their property.

This is the crux of the matter.

They do *not* "perceive [it] to be their property." They *claim* it is their property, but refuse to prove in any way, shape, or form that it *is* their property.

So.

The rest of your post is essentially mumbling about contract law, of which you come close to admitting you know almost nothing. You are saying your opinion is worth more than someone who actually knows something about contract law?

There was no misinformation about the Groklaw post. PJ stated that the Linspire/Microsoft deal, which was touted as something good for the customer, is in fact *bad* for the customer. The customer is actually purchasing a product that is hobbled, and actually *using* the product pretty much voids the whole Linspire/Microsoft "value-add."

It was actually a very good dissection of the agreement, as it affects the customer. It shows that Microsoft most definitely got the better of the deal, and Linspire and their customers kinda got shafted.

But, anyone who deals with Microsoft ends up getting shafted.

We hates it

Yeah. Because we *hate* when people back up their opinions with facts.

Re:The other foot

And who would that be exactly. The only two names that come to mind are Sun and IBM. Now they could shake down a few MS customers but if they did they would also be suing their own customers since most large customers buy products from all three vendors.

This is a rather unlikely scenario as no large suppliers like suing their customers because it is very bad for business. This also goes a long way to explain why MS are also unlikely to sue anyone either, that is unless they chuck Windows out in favor of Linux.

Of course the safest option if you are really concerned about getting a letter from MS's lawyers is to go with Solaris/OpenSolaris Sun has a very large patent lead over Microsoft and MS is only too well aware that Sun is very happy to use it to defend their customers.