Microsoft Sees No Conflicts With Patent Initiatives 84
AlexGr writes "According to Eweek's Peter Galli, Microsoft sees no contradiction between its open-source community building efforts and the more-than-thinly-veiled legal threats at Linux and other projects. Horacio Gutierrez, Microsoft's vice president of intellectual property and licensing, actually states: 'One makes the other possible, especially at a time like this, when interoperability is so important. Microsoft recognizes the importance of interoperability, which is why we are doing the things we are in our products, why we created the Interoperability Executive Customer Council, and why we are listening to customers.'"
Vader quote. (Score:5, Funny)
In other news... (Score:5, Funny)
..brings up a current topic; non-logical stances. (Score:5, Interesting)
At even the hint of a suggestion that Microsoft has made a living from using other people's ideas, Bill Gates will immediately start into a harangue about how Microsoft is a leader because of its innovation. As most people familiar with the subject (and not predisposed to believe what Microsoft/Bill Gates says) already knows, Microsoft is not an innovator.
Many very big corporations like Microsoft, and all politicians, have learned to make statements that are based on false logic, falsified logic, and plain illogic. Big Tobacco denying the link between tobacco and cancer, Big Oil explaining their profits. I'll leave the political stuff alone because that seems to bring out the trolls.
That Microsoft will openly state that there is no tension between its 'support' of open standards and software, and their other work which supports and extends 'closed' technology is not a surprise. But what disappoints is that this rather open hypocrisy seems to be so readily accepted, especially by the mainstream media.
Have we become so jaded that truth and fact no longer matter? Am I the only one who tires of this open hypocrisy?
Re:..brings up a current topic; non-logical stance (Score:2)
Re:..brings up a current topic; non-logical stance (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
The mainstream media protects and fosters hypocrisy. Corporate media is one of the big players creating modern politics worldwide.
You might be interested in this critique of AP's role. http://www.projectcensored.org/newsflash/ap_bias.h tml [projectcensored.org]
Re:..brings up a current topic; non-logical stance (Score:1)
It's not accepted, it's perpetuated (Score:2)
It's never accepted, it's only repeated in hopes to perpetuate it. If Bill Gates can only be quoted as saying one thing, how is anyone going to show him in another light unless they reso
Re:Vader quote. (Score:5, Interesting)
Microsoft has been trying to extort IP from the open source. That's their only reason behind the threats. The Open Source community doesn't need to agree to Microsoft's terms. Microsoft needs to agree to the Open Source communities terms, or whomever has the IP. Since the Open Source community has little to no reason to cross license and are willing to remove any infringing code, Microsoft has no choice but to pay up to open source.
It will be pretty funny when everyone comes to the realization that Microsoft has a significantly greater number of IP violations than open source does and they'll refuse to pay up when the time comes for the disclosure. They simply claim that the open source community didn't pay up when they were given a chance so Microsoft decided to play judge, jury, and executioner and make the balance themselves.
Microsoft is like the big oil company threatening to sue the individual car driver, and any major company that uses cars, because those people are using gasoline that may be refined using some portion of their process that wasn't "allegedly" legally licensed. It doesn't matter that this big oil company probably stole the process to begin with. Nor does it matter that they won't tell you which part was infringed so the process can be adjusted.
Microsoft's motives are not altruistic. They are not after interoperability. They are after the IP of these companies intellectual property. It is that simple. It is method of extortion. This moron that is in charge of the IP section is obviously crazy.
mmmmmmmmmm (Score:1, Funny)
Of course (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
They could just file the use of patents as bug-reports so the FOSS community can actually be aware of it and DO something about it.
But I guess it would be against their strategy to avoid people from using their patented ideas.
Hmmm ... (Score:3, Funny)
How could it? (Score:5, Insightful)
MS is a corporation. So among other things, we know that:
(1) It doesn't actually "see" anything. It's comprised of individual humans (mostly) that see things.
(2) Because it's actually a collection of minds that don't necessarily agree with each other, it doesn't tell us much that it's engaging in two actions that are potentially un-reconcilable. When we hear that a *person* "sees no conflict", we find that interesting because we figure maybe the person has discovered some reason that they two ideas in question can be reconciled. For a corporation of multiple persons, maybe no such reconciliation of the two ideas exists.
Plus it's also quite plausible that MS management has private motives that are very different than its public motives. In that case perhaps the (inauthentic) public motives are in logical conflict, but the private motives held by MS's management are actually completely self-consistent.
Law in economics (Score:4, Insightful)
There needs to be a law in economics that states that any corporation big enough, will starts to show symptoms of the corporate equivalent of Alien hand syndrome [wikipedia.org] once it has crossed a specific size.
The recent mix-up at Microsoft (one hand is trying to be nice to open-source because FOSS is the current hyped buzzword of the day while at the same time the other hand is desperately trying to find a way to crush this "evil" concurrence that threatens to overthrow them from their dominant position in the market) is a perfect illustration of such dual minded corporate behaviour (for the exact reason stated above : it's made up of too many people to have a single coherent goal).
Quick, everyone chant... (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
There's a market developing in Free software - a small market, mind you, at the moment, but showing every sign of growing - and Microsoft want to own it. It's as simple as that.
Doesn't mean they actually need to produce Free software though - they just need to own the mindspace. Their strategy over the last few years, right up to the recent events, has amounted to
There is no Conflict (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Another open letter (Score:3, Insightful)
Brad Smith & Co: If you're listening at all, just give up the threats or sue us. Piss or get off the pot. Otherwise, maybe some open source developers might get fed up and sue YOU for slander and libel.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
If you r
Re: (Score:2)
However, I *will* get an open letter published -- with more actual substance -- in a major trade rag if I have to write letters to the editor of every major trade rag on the planet.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
What? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Are you surprised?? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Disconnect (Score:2, Interesting)
Interoperability Executive Customer Council (Score:2)
Microsoft. White Canes "R" Us. (Score:2, Funny)
Microsoft. the reason there is braille on the keys of the drive-through ATM.
Re: (Score:1)
I would have figured it's just cheaper to make ALL keypads with braille than to manage two production lines, one with and one without...
Re: (Score:2)
The Interoperability Executive Customer Council (Score:4, Interesting)
What does "Interoperability Executive Customer Council" mean? An interoperability "council" of customers' executives? An executive council of (for?!?) customers?
Try as they might, I cannot see how M$ can declare war on either side of the Patented/Open software fight. Do they really think that they can exist in both camps at once and still come out a winner?
If I'm not mistaken, the Art of War deals pretty specifically with choosing one's sides/opponents carefully.
If they wish to push for interoperability, why threaten (however thinly-veiled) the Open Source community? Particularly when they themselves are "trying" to be more open?
Re: (Score:1)
What does "Interoperability Executive Customer Council" mean? An interoperability "council" of customers' executives? An executive council of (for?!?) customers?
Try as they might, I cannot see how M$ can declare war on either side of the Patented/Open software fight. Do they really think that they can exist in both camps at once and still come out a winner?
If I'm not mistaken, the Art of War deals pretty specifically with choosing one's sides/opponents carefull
Re: (Score:2)
I think this might be the key. They don't know which side to take so they are throwing out BS until one looks like a winner. MegaCrap isn't known for being the first on the block on anything but stealing other peoples stuff.
Re: (Score:1)
Gotta love WeaselWords. (Score:2)
Big difference between "listening" and "hearing"....
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, I was thinking about their track record with DRM... Just *which* customer *asked* to be treated as a criminal by default?!?
Did Microsoft just wake up? (Score:4, Interesting)
Then any adopters of Linux ( rest of world ) will be afraid of "embracing" Microsoft, for fear of the lawyer letter in the mail.
Then Microsoft is relegated to an American-Only protocol with not a helluva lot of political clout outside the US.
This will leave businesses which have embraced the Microsoft Representative with a crippled system incapable of communicating to every customer.
Unlike open source, which will.
The businessman who shook the hand of the Microsoft rep may have to stand before the CEO and explain why he should keep his job, given the company's competitors can talk to everyone, and his company, under his signature, can only talk to a subset of the customer base.
The handshake with the Microsoft rep could be the handshake of death for many corporate CIO, as the love of universally compatible systems - and systems open to verification of their operation - become the norm.
Microsoft has now shown their hand... its got claws in it. Do you want to trust it? The smiling face of someone anticipating getting you into their cat trap could turn into a gun pretty fast if it doesn't get its way.
I don't expect the American government to do much, but I do expect compatibility with the rest of the world will do it.
When you live to face the ramifications of your selections, ignorance is NOT bliss.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
I think that metaphor was the octopus of death.
sense of humor (Score:2)
It has been found to be useful , even in real life circumstances.
NB: As a start to developing a sense of humour(ease into it) , you might begin by reading the works of Camus.
No one should be surprised (Score:2)
Oblig. Billy Madison (Score:2)
Mr. Madison, what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
It's the apocalypse stupid! (Score:2)
This just in... (Score:2)
More than? (Score:1)
More than thinly veiled? I'd say the veil was long ago taken off completely.
This does make sense, in a twisted way (Score:2, Insightful)
However, Microsoft's point here is that they're happy to make patent licensing agreements (like the Novell deal) with open source software vendors. Remember, MS has stated publicly that they're happy to make the Novell deal with Red Hat, Canonical, etc.
If you're MS, and your goal is to make more Novell deals, then it makes perfect sense to make noise about your pat
lets look at their interoperability policy (Score:1)
microsofts products aren't even interoperable with each other (Office and Works? OneCare and Outlook[ Express]?)...
if they really wanted interoperability, then why
- are you not allowed to write a 100% openXML compatible office software based on the docs?
- is smb changed just when linux support was finally good?
- is the default filesystem changed just when linux support for ntfs got kinda
Thing about Microsoft.. (Score:1)
MS PR gives other PR a bad name for honesty (Score:2)
Now, of course, this is assuming that you tar all PR with the same brush. And there may well be honest PR people out there. Sorry, but if they are offended, then they shoul
Re: (Score:2)
Schizophrenic (Score:2)
One thing is for sure, you'll have an easier life if you avoid relying on their software for your own commercial gains. You won't end up building solutions using their software and then ending up being a competitor to one of their solutions or infringing on their patents.
Re: (Score:2)
If you have a large php or java servlet running linux you are less likely to switch to windows.
MS is only helping build compability so when they go after your boss for patent infringement they can sell windows as a replacement for your linux apps.
It goes hand in hand.
Do Open Source Advocates see no contradiction? (Score:1)
On the one hand, open source advocates embrace a business model some intend will put the for profit software model out of business, and then seem indignant when the for profit businesses attack the threat.
Energy Use? (Score:1)
So much for energy efficient computing.
I don't see one either (Score:2)
I now see Microsoft's goal (Score:2)
Why not switch to windows where there is no liability risk? After all you can run your same applications.
After this will be the attempt to switch former linux users into a pure Microsoft environment with all microsoft products.
Why are we discussing this? (Score:2)
This is a truth on a par with "the Earth revolves around the sun."
Nothing to see here, move along.