Microsoft/Samsung Ink Patent Deal

An anonymous reader wrote with an article at ZDNet, discussing further implications of their patent cross-licensing initiative. With options already in place with Fuji Xerox, the company is now signed up with Samsung as well. From Samsung's perspective, it is simple: these deals ensure it can sell products using Linux without facing a suit from the Redmond-based corporation. "The notion that customers and businesses need Microsoft's legal go-ahead to run Linux has been controversial for some time, with the issue rising to the surface last November after Microsoft reached an accord with Linux vendor Novell. Novell has since taken issue with Microsoft's assertion that the deal represents an acknowledgment that Linux infringes on Microsoft patents."

Re:I'm going to start a business

[kebes]

I don't understand what the companies signing these deals are thinking. It seems like suicide to me. You sign the deal, and MS agrees not to sue you for awhile. But eventually you have to re-sign the deal, and MS can dictate whatever terms they want... because if you don't sign the deal, you won't be able to distribute Linux anymore?

After all, MS can argue in court that your acceptance of the prior deal was basically an admission that you wouldn't have been allowed to distribute Linux without their blessing. So as soon as you sign the deal, you are forever controlled by MS (at least with regard to Linux distribution). Why would a company purposefully agree to have one of their business plans depend upon the whims of another company?

I typically don't like conspiracy theories, but it is almost as if Microsoft is creating these deals (using shady behind-the-scenes payoffs?) in order to create a climate where they can, eventually, either crush Linux through patents, or at least make money off of every Linux sale.

outsmart Microsoft lawyers? Novell added to list

[Locutus]

There is over 20 years of Microsoft's lawyers striking up 'deals' with 'partners' only to find out that what the 'partner' thought the contract/license/deal/scam ment was something entirely different from what Microsoft planned all along. In 1996 I was shocked that Sun Microsystems could even THINK that Microsoft would work with Java and play the good Java citizen but their lawyers thought they trust Microsoft even then and once again, we know what the result was. And that was 1996. Here we are over 10 years later and Novell lawyers and executives are surprised that what they thought they signed is different from what Microsoft knows it signed? Somebody is REALLY flunking law school or maybe their just too 'full' of themselves to realized Microsoft is not a trustworthy partner. Either way, these people have not learned a single thing from over two decades of Microsoft double-speak. IMO.

LoB

GPL?

[PPH]

From the GPL (v2):
 

You may not copy, modify, sublicense, or distribute the Program
except as expressly provided under this License. Any attempt
otherwise to copy, modify, sublicense or distribute the Program is
void, and will automatically terminate your rights under this License.

So, isn't what MicroSCOft doing in essence sublicensing the Program? And it appears to me (not being a Lawyer or subspecies thereof) that they have just lost there rights under this license.

The Linux "patent pool"

[IGnatius T Foobar]

It is clear that what Microsoft is now trying to establish, is a Linux "patent pool" similar to the one in place for MPEG. If you're in the pool, you're fine; if not, you have to pay a per-unit royalty to the pool members in order to use it.

This, of course, is so infuriating that it makes most of us want to commit actual acts of homicide against the people pushing it.

Re:I'm going to start a business

[kripkenstein]

I don't understand what the companies signing these deals are thinking. It seems like suicide to me. You sign the deal, and MS agrees not to sue you for awhile. But eventually you have to re-sign the deal, and MS can dictate whatever terms they want... because if you don't sign the deal, you won't be able to distribute Linux anymore?

If that is suicidal, then Microsoft is suicidal as well. Remember, the Microsoft-Novell deal is symmetrical (I am less sure about the Microsoft-Samsung deal) - the covenant is for patents on both sides. In 5 years (or whatever), the covenant expires. According to what you said above, Microsoft can dictate terms to Novell, or else they can't distribute Linux. But then the same goes in reverse; Novell can dictate terms or else Microsoft can't distribute Windows (Novell, remember has plenty of patents, and juicy ones). In fact Microsoft have more to lose, since they have more income.

This isn't Microsoft planning to eradicate Novell in 5 years, or anyone else. The plan is much simpler - Microsoft want to get money for Linux. If Linux is going to be a long-term, powerful force in computing, Microsoft want 'in'. They can make their own distro, and perhaps one day they will; meanwhile, they prefer to fight against Linux officially, but make money from it at the same time. In addition, by making Linux cost money (for patent licenses), Microsoft hope to remove some of its low-cost advantage over Windows.