Linspire Signs Patent Pact With MS 386
RLiegh sends us to an AP article reporting that Linspire has signed a patent deal with Microsoft. The company, which started out life as "Lindows," joins a growing list of patent agreements reached between Microsoft and vendors. Linspire will be granted a license to use True Type Fonts and "various code" that would allow for Linspire users to use voice on Windows Live Messenger as well as the usual patent protection for Linspire's customers. In return, among other things, Linspire will make Microsoft's search engine the default search on PCs shipped with their OS. Kevin Carmony, the CEO for Linspire, approached Microsoft a year and a half ago, according to the article.
The LInux business community... (Score:5, Interesting)
That's how they've always done business (Score:5, Interesting)
For instance, most companies lock down their computers. I can't even install quick time on ours - which means that unless it works with windows media, I don't visit the website. Many websites know that - so they don't use Quicktime formats. It's a neverending circle.
If I were google, I'd be thinking about doing the same thing in reverse. Get your office suite working and then begin package it free on every computer manufacturer that you can negotiate with.
What are you waiting for? (Score:5, Interesting)
Red Hat , Ubuntu please do the rest of the honours. I have no freaking idea what MS has in his pocket that all these companies have agreed to MS terms of so called *patent* protection.Hell yes, i am paranoid but that so only because MS is involved in all of these pacts, i am not at all comfortable taking the bullshit.
Why is Linux community silent on a whole? Only thing they can do is host a site called as showusthecode.com and challenging Mr Balmer. And MS responded by making one more Linux company its ally. Now i am really getting worried about my submitted code as GPL. Is this just me or something is really cooking up at Redmond?
Re:Is this really that bad of a situation? (Score:5, Interesting)
Distros that nobody uses. (Score:1, Interesting)
it is a good thing (Score:4, Interesting)
Churning 'em out before GPLv3 (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:What are you waiting for? (Score:5, Interesting)
Why is Linux community silent on a whole?
Good god, man! Are you serious? The Linux community isn't silent about anything. Novell has experienced a backlash, and the CEO had to go so far as to address it publicly. That's not insignificant, in my mind.
Now i am really getting worried about my submitted code as GPL. Is this just me or something is really cooking up at Redmond?
I'm struggling with that, too. Trying to figure out how serious a concern this is. My one solace at the moment is that what we've really got is Microsoft managing to rope Novell, and then two bit players in the game. Xandros and Linspire? Microsoft isn't exactly taking down the titans of the Linux world.
They did get Novell, and I agree that's not small potatoes - but the general opinion really seems to be that as well as getting hosed, Novell also got conned by the boys from Redmond. In the fallout - RedHat specifically rebuffed Microsoft's public offer.
Many people have compared this to the SCO fud-fest that got going - and that actually seems to be a more apt analogy the further we go. A couple of small-frys have caved in -- in their own defence, they're not equipped for a battle with Microsoft, and we must assume these are businessmen and not fanboys.
I expect Microsoft will continue to pick off the small distros, trying to build some PR momentum before training their guns on the larger players in the Linux industry. Not dissimilar to SCO's approach.
What happens then, is what tells us what's really going on here...
Or ... Embrace, Extend, Extinguish? (Score:4, Interesting)
YESSSS! Give that customer another mod point.
But rather than trying to "divide and conquer" the FOSS community, I'd suggest it's a new chapter in Microsoft's "embrace, extend, extinguish" strategy. Getting these companies to sign agreements covers the "embrace" part. The "extend" part is, perhaps, the will-not-sue covenant: it offers an extra warm/fuzzy feeling for the customer.
I'm very curious what will happen with these agreements with Novell, Xandros and now Linspire when gpl v3 arrives.
Maybe this is the "extinguish" part. AFAIK, the companies who have signed the agreements could no longer include updated versions of code that has gone to GPL3. So
Re:Divide and conquer (Score:5, Interesting)
Sure they will talk and talk, but they wont actually do anything. They have as much to lose from ridiculous software patents as anyone else. If microsoft start suing people over patents, then a large number of companies will start suing them back, including big companies like ibm and sun, which could have significant impact upon microsoft's products.
The biggest risk, comes from the small companies who have a few patents but no products. They have nothing to lose, you cant sue them because they dont have any products anyway, their entire business is litigation.
Re:The LInux business community... (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Well isn't that special? (Score:5, Interesting)
As someone who sells Linux
It'll be a cold day in h*ll before I ship a PC with Microsoft Search as the default.
---
http://www.xephi.co.uk/ [xephi.co.uk] for Linux without MS Search
Re:Is this really that bad of a situation? (Score:4, Interesting)
From the current GPL3 draft, section 11:
A contributor's "essential patent claims" are all patent claims owned or controlled by the contributor, whether already acquired or hereafter acquired, that would be infringed by some manner, permitted by this License, of making, using, or selling its contributor version, but do not include claims that would be infringed only as a consequence of further modification of the contributor version. For purposes of this definition, "control" includes the right to grant patent sublicenses in a manner consistent with the requirements of this License.
Each contributor grants you a non-exclusive, worldwide, royalty-free patent license under the contributor's essential patent claims, to make, use, sell, offer for sale, import and otherwise run, modify and propagate the contents of its contributor version.
Re:It could be worse... (Score:2, Interesting)
Open source should not be about stopping large companies from making money. If they release the changes back into the community then I don't mind if MS becomes a successfull Linux vendor.
Re:Distros that nobody uses. (Score:3, Interesting)
That's really funny (Score:5, Interesting)
- Truetype is an APPLE innovation
- Truetype was developed over 20 years ago, so any patents pertaining to such have long run out. Even if there were valid claims, APPLE would have to be the one to pursue the claims. Somehow I cannot see Apple doing this.
- Fonts aren't copyrightable, based on numerous court precedents (note: a font is distinct from a typeface: a font is a typeface with a style, weight, size applied)
A typeface dscriptor (a
So, licensing truetype fonts to Linux distributions? Ha. I hope these linux vendors are not paying so much as a dime for these "agreements"
Re:It could be worse... (Score:1, Interesting)
Yes! That would be great, but if they distribute Linux at all, the license terms require them to give away all of the software patents that they claim it infringes. Because they want to use software patents as a lever to kill off use of Linux within businesses (except for businesses paying the required protection money), Microsoft cannot afford to distribute Linux - ever.
Not about shutting down companies (Score:3, Interesting)
See, right now, you have the freedom to download and install Linux on as many machines as you desire. Imagine a corporation with thousands of computers. Imagine the license fee savings alone, let alone the freedom of modifying the system to fit your business model, rather than fitting your business model to your software. Right now nobody can tell you that you must purchase a per-seat license, and you don't have the right to make modifications, or distribute those modifications.
Microsoft is attempting to change all that. They are trying to put the cloud of patent litigation over every "unauthorized" installation of Linux. They are trying to give the appearance that they are the ultimate arbiters of who can and cannot use Linux. They are giving veiled threats: "It'd be a shame if somethin' bad were to happen to your network infrastructure. A damn dirty shame."
If Microsoft were simply to create an MS-Linux, they would be forced by the licenses to release their modifications. They would have to abide by the various licenses. Now, granted, they could make changes to the X Windows System, or Apache, or Perl, and not release those modifications back to the community, but they would then have to suffer the non-standard nature of their distro. But, MS-Linux would be an overall win for Linux, and for free software.
And, I believe, for Microsoft.
The path they have chosen is the path of pain. It will harm everyone involved, and many not currently involved. All of use will suffer. Right now, Microsoft is trying to keep their name in the news, with the appearance that they own Linux. I'm not sure about the timing, but I bet it has to do with corporate license renewals, especially concerning Vista. I would bet their salesmen are able to point at the news and say, "See that? We own Linux, too. Now how about signing that license renewal? We'll give you a great deal. We'll throw in patent indemnity for Linux, for a modest fee."
Re:PANIC IN THE HENHOUSE! VISTA DOES NOT SELL! (Score:1, Interesting)
It's because Windows is still largely bundled on every new PC, and PC sales are reaching record highs. It's not that hard to figure out.
On the other hand, OEMs like HP, IBM and Dell are still shipping PCs with Windows XP on them due to customer demand. Imagine that...customers *demanding* a downgraded product.
Yeah, there's nothing wrong with Vista. Keep telling yourself that.
Re:This will devide [sic] the boys from the men (Score:4, Interesting)
None of which is to denigrate the Linux people in any way. They've done a great job in raising the profile of Open Source / Free Software (and they are the same thing) to the point where an entrenched monopoly is running scared.
As for Hurd, well, that failed simply because it's a microkernel and microkernels plain don't work. Hurd is designed around the idea of building fences where they look pretty, irrespective of how much traffic may have to pass through them. Linux is designed around the idea of building fences where as little traffic as possible ever has to pass through them, no matter how ugly it may look to an outsider with no understanding of what those fences are there to do. The existence of layers is natural, but the boundaries between them are determined by cold, hard mathematics. Attempting to adjust those boundaries will ultimately be futile.
What about Ubuntu/Linspire CnR partnership? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Its because they can't attack Ubuntu directly . (Score:4, Interesting)
It appears that rights to use MS codecs was not unlimited and Linspire wanted to continue with that 'feature' of their distro. My guess is that alot of the motives behind this was the extension of the licensing for those codecs. Like in the Novell deal, Microsoft probably 'requires' the fake IP protection crap or else any other deal would fail or cost too much. It's typically how they operate.
How this will impact the Click-n-Run deal with Ubuntu will be something to look at since I'm sure Microsoft would not want Linspire to just hand out those codecs to just anybody.
I will warn others to not believe this is about Microsoft collecting fees from Linux. Microsoft runs by Windows and without Windows, they fall. Therefore, all this IP licensing stuff is about killing Linux or killing corporate use of Linux one way or another. They've shown before that they're willing to spend billions just to protect the Windows monopoly/gravy-train and Linux is a threat. IMO.
LoB
Re:The LInux business community... (Score:1, Interesting)
We know that shareholders generally demand their companies make ever-increasing profits in order to justify the shareholders' investments and the risks they entail.
We know that many/most Enterprise customers who have mixed (e.g., Windows, Mac, GNU/Linux, UNIX) IT environments really DO need/want BOTH software interoperability and to sleep well at night without having to worry about copyright/patent lawsuits, et al - whether those lawsuits are bogus or not.
Now, imagine YOU are the CEO of a commercial GNU/Linux software vendor. Suppose YOUR company wasn't currently very profitable (if profitable at all!) selling GNU/Linux software and related services in a HIGHLY COMPETITIVE, Microsoft-dominated software market. Furthermore, suppose you KNEW Microsoft was already doling out MILLIONS to companies that are eager and willing to make what seems like an EASY business decision? Finally, suppose you were earning a "nice living" as a CEO and really NEEDED/WANTED to keep your job.
Given all of those circumstances, what would YOU do?
IF you were SMART you too would quickly grab Microsoft's filthy lucre and then swear up and down in a loud and clear voice that there is NO WAY in Hades that the GNU/Linux software you are peddling and supporting infringes on ANY of Microsoft's patents. No way whatsoever!
IF you were SMART...and if you also wanted to keep your Enterprise customers, your Board of Directors and your company's shareholders happy and off your freakin' back!
NOW you know WHY Novell, Xandros and Linspire (and more to come, I'm sure) are "dancing with the devil". It's called "life in the REAL world". So deal with it and move on.