Microsoft talks about patents and Microsoft intellectual property in Linux all the time. It most recently came up in relation to the Microsoft/ Novell deal, when in the aftermath of the Linux community’s hostile reaction, and the business community’s confused reaction, Steve Ballmer claimed that every user of Linux uses Microsoft intellectual property. And people freaked out. Not because they were surprised that Steve Ballmer would say that, or that they were concerned it was true. Most of the drama was because the person who said that was now an ally of a major Linux distribution (the Novell-managed SUSE Linux), and while people were used to Steve Ballmer saying ridiculous things about Linux, they were not-so-used to Linux companies having scary deals with companies run by people who said such ridiculous things.

(deep breath)

And today Fortune magazine has a relatively in-depth summary of Microsoft’s Linux patent claims. It’s really not that great of a story, and has some misleading references in it, but it has a dramatic title, “Microsoft takes on the free world,” and yet another mention of Microsoft wanting compensation for the intellectual property it claims exists in Linux, “…It wants royalties from distributors and users.” But Microsoft has said this before. And Steve still won’t say he’d actually sue Linux-using customers:

If push comes to shove, would Microsoft sue its customers for royalties, the way the record industry has?

“That’s not a bridge we’ve crossed,” says CEO Ballmer, “and not a bridge I want to cross today on the phone with you.”

So there is no new story here. Microsoft has claimed IP in Linux before, and has stopped short of saying what they’d actually do about it before. As a Slashdot commenter said, “

Here’s what the interview should have been:

Microsoft: It’s a fact that Linux and free software infringe hundreds of our patents.
Journalist: Which ones?
Microsoft: Well, the kernel violates 60, the GUI violates…
Journalist (interrupting): which 60? Where is the list?
Microsoft: I’m not prepared to disclose that at this time.
Journalist: Well this is a big [effing] waste of my time, isn’t it?
Journalist: I went through this same dance with Darl McBride. Call me when you have something to say, bye

Microsoft still won’t say exactly what Microsoft patents exist in Linux, so as outrageous as some of the ideas in the Fortune feature are, they’re not new. If there’s any info here, maybe it’s that Microsoft has now specified the amount of patents, (235), but still not what those patents are.

A commenter on Patent Law Blog, Patently-O:

That’s like a poker player saying “I win” without showing their cards (code).

Recommended or related:

• Tara Hunt’s Okay, we won. But what’s the prize? (especially the part about Non-zero Sum Economics)
• Matt Asay’s Making sense of Microsoft’s open source fetish
• Robert Scoble’s Microsoft about to enter into patent war
• James Turner at O’Reilly’s ONLamp Looks like Microsoft is ramping up for Son of SCO (I disagree with the “do or die” part, but he’s got some great comparisons to SCO here.)
  

Technorati Tags: patents, microsoft, linux, IP, intellectual property, legal, law, suit, fortune magazine, steve ballmer, cruise-azy, open source, oss, software ]]> http://thesethingsmattertome.com/2007/05/13/the-new-fortune-magazine-story-on-microsoft-linux-and-patents-steve-ballmer-you-so-crazy-but-not-in-a-new-way/feed/ 0 http://thesethingsmattertome.com/2006/11/14/novell-sun-two-ships-passing-in-the-night/ http://thesethingsmattertome.com/2006/11/14/novell-sun-two-ships-passing-in-the-night/#comments Tue, 14 Nov 2006 16:59:00 +0000 andy http://thesethingsmattertome.com/?p=129 Wowza… so much hub-bub yesterday about Sun open-sourcing Java. It almost drowned out this news:

• Samba project asks Novell to back out of Microsoft agreement
  They say:

Using patents as competitive tools in the free software world is not acceptable. Novell, as a participant in numerous debates, discussions and conferences on the topic knew this to be the case. We call upon Novell to work with the Software Freedom Law Center to undo the patent agreement and acknowledge its obligations as a beneficiary of the Free Software community.

And somehow this gets connected to the Sun Java announcement. Samba isn’t the only one bugged by the Microsoft/ Novell arrangement. While Sun already had plans to open source Java, they had not decided on a license. It turns out that Sun decision to use the GPL is directly related to the Novell/ Microsoft agreement.

Sun CEO Jonathan Schwartz writes:

… one of the strongest motivations to select the GPL was the announcement made last week by Novell and Microsoft, suggesting that free and open source software wasn’t safe unless a royalty was being paid. As an executive from one of those companies said, “free has to have a price.”

That’s nonsense.

Free software can be free of royalties, and free of impediments to broadscale, global adoption and deployment. Witness what we’ve done with Solaris, and now, what we’ve done with Java. Developers are free to pick up the code, and create derivatives. Without royalty or obligation.

Those that say open source software can’t be safe for customers – or that commercially indemnified software can’t foster community – are merely advancing their own agenda. Without any basis in fact.

They’re also fighting a rising tide.

Related:

• Ubuntu to include Java, now that it’s GPL‘d
• Novell stock down after initial bump since Microsoft announcement (via CRN)
• David Berlind correctly predicted Java going GPL, before it happened
• Novell blog addresses open source community’s negative reaction to Microsoft/ Novell agreement
• Sun’s Tim Bray on the internal discourse and resistance and encouragement, of the open sourcing of Java