181183
story
Comments: 157 +- Linux: Novell Worries About GPL v3 on Wednesday May 30 2007, @09:14AM
Posted
by
CmdrTaco
on Wednesday May 30 2007, @09:14AM
from the deliver-the-code-and-nobody-cares dept.
from the deliver-the-code-and-nobody-cares dept.
background: url(//a.fsdn.com/sd/topics/topicnovell.gif); width:55px; height:62px;
novell
background: url(//a.fsdn.com/sd/topics/topicsoftware.gif); width:65px; height:65px;
software
background: url(//a.fsdn.com/sd/topics/topiclinux.gif); width:60px; height:70px;
linux
An anonymous reader writes "In its annual report for the fiscal year ended October 31, 2006, Novell expressed concerns over how the new version of the GPL may affect their business. Microsoft might stop distributing Suse coupons if the GPL version 3 interferes with their agreement or puts Microsoft's patents at risk, ultimately causing Novell's business and operating results to be adversely affected."
Related Stories
Final Draft of GPLv3 Allows Novell-Microsoft Deal 113 comments
There is a 20% chance of tomorrow.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest © 1997-2009 Geeknet, Inc.
Wow, Novell is worried??? (Score:5, Informative)
In other news, water is wet, fire still burns to the touch, and we still refuse to make a distinction between Microsoft, and those who harbor them.
Re:Wow, Novell is worried??? (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Oblig Star Wars (Score:2, Funny)
Being paranoid is S.O.P in these things. (Score:5, Insightful)
Not quite "nothing to see here, move along" but definitely not a tabloid headline.
Exactly (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
Mind you, they failed to mention the imminent destruction of all life on Earth by the asteroid headed this way...
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Thus, the price would remain forever at whichever value was last recorded. That's why it's not in the report. It won't alter prices in the least.
Can you feel the love? (Score:3, Interesting)
As a dying and irrelevant company, Novell aquires a linux distribution to save themselves, and summarily get in bed with Microsoft, who essentially would prefer to either cage or completely destroy FOSS. Within this "tasty little eggroll" is the fact that Novell seems to forget that FOSS isn't just software but a social movement.
It is a software movement pushed forward by and large by the people who actually are responsible for running large segments of the internet and computer infrastructure worldwide. Linux has been taken well past Linus Torvald's initial vision because there was a *need* for an alternative in the data center.
Novell should be worried- very worried. First, their distribution isn't all that good in my experience. Debian and Redhat basically bury it in important areas (cost, stability and Q&A- pick two). Second, they get in bed with Microsoft, a company that provides more frustration per byte than any other software company in history.
I revert to a lame Star Trek quote:
Spock: "They are dying" (in reference to the Klingons)
Kirk: "Let them die!!"
I've never used Suse, but have tested the distro, and talked with their reps. I never used them because I think their product is below par. The Microsoft deal again reinforces the decisions I made for clients who expend a great deal of money on data infrastructure and expect a minimum of frustration.
Evolution works people. Sit back and grab a coffee.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
I drink a lot of coffee.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
22 years of system engineering experience, a thoughtful commentary, and supported opinion get you modded down?
Ack! I'll refrain from commenting further and go back to running my business.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
If you really used SUSE you would know Evolution doesn't work at all, at least not with Exchange. But seriously, Evolution (the app) sucks. It will begetting much better very soon however. As part of Novell's current program of kissing my CIO's ass they fixed most of the major bugs which made it useless in the enterprise. So the version he and I are running is actually quite decent. I can't wait till they distribute the patches so I can run it on a bette
Re:Can you feel the love? (Score:5, Interesting)
The FOSS community gets hung up on the philosophy because to be honest if you do not adhere to your original philosophy then you end up like Google's 'Do No Evil' philosophy. Basically it gets ignored or back burner-ed for the reasons of profit.
Remember that the GPL was about making free software available to all. It was also designed to protect developers and projects from the overreaching commercial interests that the Microsoft-Novell deal basically puts into writing. Just look at the terms of it, they explicitly exclude Open Office, Wine and I think Samba... If Microsoft was serious about extending the olive branch to the OSS community they would not have made these glaring exceptions in the Novell deal.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Well, To be technical, Novell has a few other choices too. The staying with GPLv2 option can be divided into finding support to keep GPL2 ports going. And if they did it often enough and well enough, they would be driving the GPLv3 counterparts development. OR they could just fracture the FOSS community
oh no! (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:oh no! (Score:4, Insightful)
Parent
I surely do feel sorry for them... (Score:5, Informative)
Yes, I surely do feel sorry for Novel.
Peter.
Why worry? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Why worry? (Score:5, Insightful)
as soon as is practical.
These tools are written and maintained by RMS et al. who have an idealogical commitment to GPL 3 and Open Source and dont really care about market share etc.
So if Suse want to distribute a linux minus the tools, the compilers and a major desktop environment good luck to them.
Incidently there is a business principle so basic I dont think it is even mentioned in self help management books
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Most of that is pretty mature stuff. Forking at GPL v2 and maintaining the fork really wouldn't be that big of a deal.
Are you joking? There is probably more ongoing effort put into improvements to GCC than almost any other project I can think of. There are a lot of people (at various big companies) whose sole job is to improve GCC. The main advantage of GPL OSS over BSD is that you get continuing improvements from other players. Having to maintain all of that yourself in a fork means you might as well go with BSD licensed software in the first place. At least them you're not specifically generating ill will while losing
Re:Why worry? (Score:4, Insightful)
GPLv3. None of these companies are selling GCC. They use it as a tool. They don't want submarine patents in it any more than individual users do. It takes effort to switch to a non-standard fork and download from a new place. It takes effort to approve a new license within a company. Approving a new license, however, is a one time stamp from legal, while switching versions to non-standard ones has to be done for every project and has to be done by engineers within the company, who probably would prefer to stick with the RMS version. I'm betting if it comes down to a fork it will be Novell left out in the cold by themselves while almost everyone else goes GPLv3.
Parent
A few reasons... (Score:3, Interesting)
Why would they be? It's "beta". But that's not the point. Of course anyone can publish their intellectual property under any license they feel like. But obviously, companies that are invested in the dreaded DRA and have associations with other companies that do, will be nervous.
I think that hardware companies that use embedded OSS have the most to fear, as it opens up a huge can of worms for product liability and suppor
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
No, it's not counter-productive, because having something merely called Free, but which actually isn't, doesn't do us any good anyway!
Personally, I don't give a shit about "Open Source" software. "Free Software," on the other hand, is important, as is keeping it Free. If those companies wanted to have their product be restricted, they should have used something BSD-licensed instead.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Parts of the kernel are GPL2 or later (Score:3, Informative)
Are all parts of the kernel GPLv2 only? There are tons of contributors, are they all required to do GPLv2 only?
It looks like some 40% of the Linux kernel is GPL v2 or later.
How much Linux kernel code is GPL v2 only? [blogspot.com]
That is not to suggest that parts of the kernel can be distributed under the GPL v3. That would require some careful study of the licenses to work out whether it would be consider just an aggregation of parts.
Cheers,
Toby Haynes
GPL2 vs GPL3 (Score:2)
Re:GPL2 vs GPL3 (Score:5, Informative)
Patent abuse and using patents to threaten and intimidate.
MS made public statements to the affect that they have patents on unnamed technology used in Linux. In doing so, they may very well have caused some potential adopters of Linux to change their minds and go with Windows for their project. Further, MS agreed to some deal with Novell whereby they are selling coupons that are promises not to sue, if people use Novell technologies instead of more serious competitors to MS on the desktop.
The idea behind the GPL is that you cannot include code you know is covered by a patent in GPL3 software, unless you agree to license that patent to everyone who uses the copyrighted code. It prevents submarine patents being hidden in GPL3 code and it prevents Novell from gaining customers through veiled threats of patent litigation from MS.
Parent
Loophole (Score:2, Informative)
MS/Novell are saying "MS aren't parties to the GPL because they aren't copying the code and Novell aren't licensing the patents" which means that MS don't have to allow GPL use of their patents in GPL code (because they didn't write it) and Novell don't have the right t
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
To oversimplify somewhat less drastically: you can use the GPLv3 with patented software, but you're required to license the patent Freely along with it (regardless of whether they got the GPL'd code from you or from anyone else).
Sleep withy dogs (Score:5, Funny)
Didn't anyone tell you that if you sleep with dogs, you'll get fleas.
Re:Sleep with dogs. Fixed 4u. (Score:2)
Didn't anyone tell you that if you sleep with Microsoft, you'll get fleeced.
Re: (Score:2)
Not Novell's problem (Score:2)
No returns. Thanks for the millions. Sorry you can't use the coupons as you intended. They make lovely wallpaper, though.
Re: (Score:2)
Just re-read the marketing agreement. Yup, this is the best thing that could happen for Novell. MS can't return the coupons. If they can't distribute them, MS can't compete with Novell in the same market with the same product. Like I said at the time, MS just bought some really expensive wallpaper for their Redmond office. I'm sure it will look lovely.
Cross Licensing?? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Cross Licensing?? (Score:4, Informative)
I work for IBM. I run Linux. I contribute to open source projects in accordance with IBM guidelines. So I think I'm pretty informed on the topic.
As far as I know, IBM does not distribute Linux, ever. As an IBM employee, I'm not even allowed to give you a free copy of Debian. IBM's position is that customers who want Linux should purchase it from SuSE or RedHat, or download it themselves.
(Opinions mine, not IBM's. This is not an official statement of policy, just what I understand to be the case.)
Parent
Poor Novell (Score:2)
I think I speak for all of us here when I say... (Score:3, Funny)
Is Novell brain dead? (Score:2)
And this would be a bad thing...how? (Score:2)
Microsoft might stop distributing Suse coupons if the GPL version 3 interferes with their agreement or puts Microsoft's patents at risk, ultimately causing Novell's business and operating results to be adversely affected
Wow, what a crying shame that would be. The company that sullied themselves getting in bed with Microsoft being adversely affected. Excuse me while I work up a little tear.
How's that old saying go? Lie down with dogs, get up with fleas.
That they dealt with Microsoft is not the issue (Score:5, Insightful)
what the covenant really means .. (Score:5, Interesting)
Well DOH, the 'covenant' only applies to a very restricted set of NOVL customers and specifically excludes downstream providers or developers of 'Original Work'. The pledge also lays claim to 'Original Work' and excludes openSuSE developers from working on their own code in company time. Any such work must also be rolled back into Novell SuSE. Not much of a covenant then.
Wow there, I just noticed something, it don't say original code, but original work, thereby extending the coverage to properties and methods? If this was cricket that would be know as throwing a googly
'1.10 "Customers" means an enterprise or individual that utilizes a specific copy of a Covered Product for its intended purpose as authorized by a Party in consideration for Revenue'
What is the definition of 'intended purpose' and 'utilizes' in the current context. Who defines 'intended purpose' and 'utilizes'. If these terms are not defined (I can't find them) or can be arbitarly changed by either party at a future date then of what use is it to me the 'customer' as a legal document. I'm not a lawyer, but this says to me the 'pledge' can be revoked at any time. By either party I assume. I do assume the NOVL lawyers got one too. I can't see it! I do assume the NOVL lawyers actually read it before signing!
"In addition, Microsoft reserves the right to prospectively update and revise the terms of this pledge"
A close reading of the 'covenant' and associated documents reveals its true purpose, to drive a wedge between the Commercial Sector and Open Source developers.
MICROSOFT - NOVELL PATENT COOPERATION AGREEMENT [sec.gov] --
translation: I pledge not to sue you for indeterminate IP violations for a period that can be arbitrary revised, extended, canceled by me at any time. You agree that I own your own original work - not just code
Yes, but... (Score:5, Funny)
...surely there's a down side too?
TWW
Dig your own grave (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Democracy is democracy, with or without laws...i generally don't really care about laws...