Microsoft and LG Electronics Sign Linux Covenant 263
rs232 wrote with a PC World link discussing another alliance between Microsoft and a vendor via Linux. The vendor this time around is electronics maker LG, and marks the fifth company to license unspecified patents relating to Linux or Linux devices from the OS giant. "'This agreement is focused only on exchange of patent rights,' said David Kaefer, general manager of IP licensing at Microsoft. 'The open-source elements of the deal do utilize a covenant model similar to the Xandros and Novell deals, but this deal is most similar to recent agreements with Samsung and Fuji Xerox.' Those deals were signed this year in April and March, respectively. Both covered general access to intellectual property contained in patent portfolios and included protection for customers using Linux-based software."
Just wasting their money... (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Just wasting their money... (Score:4, Interesting)
When all is said and done MSFT is PAYING Novell 140 million dollars.
That's right people MSFT is paying protection money to Linux vendors, while telling the press the exact opposite.
read the facts for yourself. not MSFT PR spin only.
Re:Just wasting their money... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
In addition, LG will be making ongoing payments to Microsoft to cover Microsoft patents as they relate to Linux-based embedded devices that LG produces.
Re:Just wasting their money... (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
it's the fine print of MSFT PR spin.
Re:Just wasting their money... (Score:5, Insightful)
Microsoft is basically buying rights to all of the patents owned by the companies they sign these deals with, so MS can go ahead and infringe on them at will. Pretty sweet deal when you're Microsoft. If anyone else violates the patent, those groups will have to fight against Microsoft's competition.
They also create the perception that anyone who hasn't signed such an agreement is likely to be in violation and therefore in a sketchy legal position. They haven't proven it or anything, merely asserted it and gotten some credibility by having people sign up and appear to agree.
Microsoft is NOT paying protection money to Linux vendors. They're making it look like those companies got something in return for giving up a whole lot more in the end. They're buying the perception that it's in the interest of everyone else to do the same, as well as access to a load of patents in others portfolios. If Microsoft is offering you cash, they're not doing it for altruistic reasons.
Sure, the vendor got the candy bar
Cheers
Re: (Score:2)
Linux isn't a company (Score:3, Insightful)
However, now that Linux has become commercialized, it's possible to take over those companies.
Re:Just wasting their money... (Score:5, Insightful)
They are essentially extorting the IP from these guys while making Linux the bad guys. This is wrong and people should be pushing back at these companies for entering into such baseless agreements. They are going after some of the little guys (Xandros) in order to try to put more weight behind their current situation.
If anyone knows much about Xandros they know these guys are nothing in the Linux industry yet it made headlines. It is simply due to the Linux vs Microsoft names.
We need to know those IPs so we can push back. People should be putting a concerted effort into suing Microsoft for abandonment of the IP since they won't bring forward any evidence. They should be sued for slander (making false accusations that they know to be false in an attempt to have others believe those accusations to be true and to intentionally do harm.) They then need to be sued for libel for getting that material printed and not making an effort to correct it.
I don't think there should be no closed proprietary software. I just think that Microsoft is just wrong in pushing the industry by misleading vendors and others.
Re: (Score:2)
Being pedantic... (Score:5, Insightful)
If you have paid for the right to use a patent then you cannot possibly infringe by definition.
Microsoft is buying rights to other people's patents because it makes a huge amount of stuff and there is a significant probability that they would otherwise infringe.
Other people want access to Microsoft because there is a significant chance that the stuff they build on top of Linux might infringe even if Linux does not.
Microsoft has a metric crapload of patents. The chance that Linux does not infringe at all is rather small. The real issue there is not infringement but what attempts they will or can make to enforce.
I don't think that the regulatory regime is going to be such that Microsoft can safely engage in SCO style tactics even if they wanted to.
Re:Being pedantic... (Score:4, Interesting)
BTW, how much does it cost to fight a patent invalidation suit when you have some clear prior art? Is it possible to ask the USPTO (we are almost always talking US software-related patents) to re-examine a patent in light of some newly found prior art?
False Statement (Score:5, Insightful)
Your statement is very clever, but untrue.
Yes, microsoft is paying linux vendors. But history has shown that Microsoft has an end-game in mind that will harm everyone.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
--jeffk++
Re:Just wasting their money... (Score:5, Insightful)
This is because Microsoft knows that they have peaked in the software industry, and they are desperately seeking a way to continue their unprecedented growth. We all know it's not going to happen; most of Microsoft's hardware products (aside from keyboards, joysticks, and mice) have been duds in the marketplace. They are looking for other proven markets where they might be able to get a running start. They tried WebTV - it was a good idea, but a poor implementation (okay, my 94-year-old grandma uses webtv, but it's amazing she even knows what the Internet is, let alone uses it). They tried search engines and failed miserably, even though the MSIE default page was MSN. They tried to get into media, but between the MSNBC channel never gaining on CNN and Fox, their DRM schemes breaking compatibility steering people even MORE to iTunes (Plays for Sure, a semi-established standard not working with their own Zune media player), and the Xbox floundering in the marketplace, they don't know what to go to next for growth.
What's next? Cellphones? Televisions? Razor-thin margins are not Microsoft's style, and certainly are not going to maintain the long-term growth they are looking for. Automobiles? Aside from GPS devices on WinCE, there isn't much opportunity there. Oh sure, you could have a WinCE-based ECM managing your engine and accessories, but does anyone really want to drive an automobile so dependent upon Windows with its history of defects? I'd rather have the ECM be very, very good at running the engine, where it focuses on nothing but keeping the engine running. What else is there? PVRs? Tivo and the dish and cable companies have that maarket locked up. Medical devices? Not on your life; Windows is not known for security and stability, do you really want a neurosurgeon using robotics based on WinCE operating on your brain if you get into an accident? I didn't think so.
I think the Novell deal is something different though. I think that they want to focus more on services and become a solutions provider like IBM did, so that way no matter WHAT the techology choice is, Microsoft still get at least a slice of the pie, and then other forces at Microsoft who are desperate to maintain their positions and power at Microsoft are using this development to spread anti-Linux FUD.
In any event, the future will reveal what is going on. Everything above may be totally off base, but really, I do think that these moves are out of desperation because they see the strength of their stock eroding very quickly. The smart money for long-term growth would be to invest in open source solution providers, sponsors of Linux distributions, and alternative choices such as Apple Computer, where they don't try to dominate the market, but to maintain gradual long term growth and foster customer retention by delivering a quality product that just works.
Re: (Score:2)
Microsoft counter-sues lone developer because of the unknown microsoft patents that he has violated and that other developers, distributors and end users have specifically paid microsoft protection money for.
A precedent has been set - more than a few linux oriented companies are "paying" microsoft for unknown patent licensing because of linux.
--jeffk++
Re:Just wasting their money... (Score:5, Informative)
Not quite; the scales are still tipped in the developer's favor.
Here's why: the resolution for the patent infringement is to cease distribution of the infringing patent, to license the patent, or to reimplement in a non-infringing way.
The resolution for copyright infringement is to pay damages for _each_ instance of infringement (every unit shipped/distributed/downloaded) AND cease distribution of the infringing product until it is reimplemented in a non-infringing way.
Re: (Score:2)
Got the money to do that? Go for it. Not many do...
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
BTW, many open source programs are incredibly good. Valgrind is one of them, which goes way beyond anything that microsoft has.
--jeffk++
Re: (Score:2)
In any case, it's much harder to avoid violating a patent than violating copyright. You can violate a patent quite innocently, but it's hard to violate copyright accidentally.
BTW, I didn't suggest that open source programs aren't good. Just that there was little that was so original and difficult to implement that MS would be inclined to copy them line by line.
So there's still some justice in the world (Score:5, Funny)
235 patents.
I say again: 235 patents.
Considering how rock solid Windows has been since Windows 2000, and that Linux is still a little flaky, I'm guessing the kernel developers didn't have access to the stability patents by Microsoft.
Well, I'm really only surprised that LG didnt just license Windows instead and be rid of all the issues at once.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Bravo.
----
Get yourself a real Linux laptop: http://www.linuxnotebooks.co.uk/ [linuxnotebooks.co.uk]
Re:Just wasting their money... (Score:5, Insightful)
once GPL3 is out?
Question: Can Samsung/LG/etc legally use Linux in their product once
1) They have signed one of these satanic "patent deals"
2) GPL3 is out
If not, have Microsoft have effectively cornered the entire embedded systems
market? Maybe they finally figured out that the future of computing is not
necessarily on the desktop...
I stall can't figure out what's in it for LG.
Re: (Score:2)
Someone really needs to put an end to this patent threat nonsense.
Re: (Score:2)
Linux is an obvious choice.
But so is BSD, Solaris, HPUX, AIX, OSX, and anything not affiliated, partnered or influenced by Microsoft.
When monopolies choose to declare war on their cust
Re: (Score:2)
We haven't seen the wording of the deal, so we can't say. Perhaps the agreement is so vague that it covers nothing that can be pinned down - like the Novell deal? Such deals appear to be (to me) just words, with no legal effect (if they wanted to protect actual products, they would name them... not too hard, is it?).
My personal take on all these deals is that Micro
Re: (Score:2)
This is almost certainly not the case. Very few companies are interested in using the bare kernel without the rest of the OS. And most of the rest of the OS is going to go GPL3.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Just wasting their money... (Score:4, Insightful)
No, they're not trying to crush Linux.
What they're trying to do is pry the whole of FOSS development out of the community and into the commercial arena by creating a mesh of patent agreements with other commercial organisations.
They've used the SCO lawsuits to move the focus of software IP from copyright to patents, and now they're establishing a financial base to a massive collection of patents as transactions between them and their partners. What that does is create a value for the lost revenue which they can claim as a result of any infringement. Once this is in place, Microsoft themselves don't need to sue anyone directly. They can use a sock-puppet partner, or just wait for the inevitable, given the US's litigious patent history. In either case, it will provide a massive chilling effect to independent and FOSS software.
By indemnifying those who've established those transactions, they can do this in a way which won't invite reprisals from their existing competitors. However, any developer not affiliated with one of MS's patent partners will be treading a minefield, and a minefield in which the cost of a false step is clearly established and very large.It's a very clever move, and I think it will succeed in marginalising FOSS developers who aren't protected by large organisations.
Microsoft know it can deal with businesses, they're terrified by the amorphous mass of developers fostered by licenses like the GPL. By isolating small developers and hobbyists, they can make community software development irrelevant. This also explains why there's been so much astroturf trying to demonize GPL3 lately, both here and in the wider computer community. I suspect however, that GPL3 will be too little, too late, given the scope of Microsoft's patent strategy.
It will be interesting times ahead, but I think Microsoft's picked a winner here.
The cascade effect has started. (Score:2, Insightful)
Embrace, extend and extinguish [wikipedia.org]
When will the USDOJ step in and put a stop to this? Probably never.
Goodbye GNU/Linux. I loved you, while you lasted.
Re:The cascade effect has started. (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Personally I liked the AmigaDOS Guru Meditation Errors better than the BSOD.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:The cascade effect has started. (Score:5, Informative)
Anti-trust.
MS is pressuring people to sign these agreements under the veil that they could get sued by Microsoft -- even though none of their claims have been released or validated.
Snidely imply that Linux violates your patents, get people to sign up and cross license their patents with you, then use that as further pressure to get other people to sign up for licensing agreements. These companies didn't go to MS and say "hey, we'd like to do that" -- I bet thy got told that if they *didn't*, then they could be subject to legal action.
Illegally using your market dominance to unfairly compete -- too bad the USDOJ lost their balls to actually do anything. Notice, they still haven't complied with the EUs requirements.
Basically, they're just thumbing their nose at people who are pointing out what they are doing is supposed to be illegal.
Cheers
The slashdot version of antitrust (Score:2)
Re:The cascade effect has started. (Score:5, Funny)
Help! I'm confused (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Help! I'm confused (Score:5, Insightful)
Novel pays MSFT $100 odd million. MSFT pays novel $240 million.
Novell nets $140 million dollars, and MSFT literally spews FUD, when MSFT did the paying.
Xandros and LG are just cashing in on the deal. Not for Linux's sake but for free money from MSFT.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
"Hi! I'm from Microsoft!"
"Oh, hello there!"
"Would you like some money?"
"Geee, sure!"
"Fine, just sign right here."
Re: (Score:2)
This is just business as usual with patents - big companies sign cross licensing / "non-aggression treaties" with each other so that they can bomb, err, sue smaller companies without the big companies feeling threatened. This is only interesting because it may include some specific wording that will run afoul of GPLv3.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
First they came... (Score:4, Insightful)
I remained silent;
I did not use OpenSUSE.
When they locked Xandros into a deal,
I remained silent;
I did not use their software either.
When they came for LG Electronics,
I did not speak out;
As I did not think it meant anything.
And finally when the suits came for Ubuntu,
there was no one left to speak out.
Embrace, Extend, Destroy.
Re: (Score:2)
Don't you people get it? Microsoft is trying to destroy Linux as a viable platform for corporate use.
Hello? Linus? You need to sue Microsoft for slander of title.
Re: (Score:2)
Corporations that are using Linux are generally already using vendor supplied OSes such as RHEL. I suspect that MS is more concerned about Linux in the consumer market right now than the Enterprise and here is why. Vista is not an upgrade option for many of the PCs that are still quite new, and the anti-piracy measures in Vista are sincere enough that casual copying won't happen either. This leaves Joe Six-Pack (free as in
Re: (Score:2)
The real problem here isn't Microsoft, it's software patents. If Microsoft really was the problem, IBM might save us. But... IBM isn't going to save anyone from software patents - extorting companies with their giant patent portfolio is the *reason they have laywers*. As Mark Shuttleworth says [markshuttleworth.com], Microsoft may actually end up being one of the good guys on this issue in the medium to long term.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
These corporate deals have no force of legal precedence, so they are irrelevant w.r.t. Linux being defended in any potential court cases. It's more about Microsoft paying for advertising and corporations paying for blue-sky warm fuzzies.
I prefer the original from 1996 (Score:2)
First they came for CP/M.
But I didn't speak up,
Because I didn't care about an operating system.
Then they came for WordPerfect.
But I didn't speak up,
Because their word processor was supposed to be so easy.
Then they came for Lotus 1-2-3.
But I didn't speak up,
Because their spreadsheet promised to be compatible.
Then they came for Netscape.
But I didn't speak up,
Because they gave me their web browser for free.
Then they came for the heart of our network.
But I didn't speak u
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
No one was 'cheapening' anything. His little Slashdot joke will not cause anyone to shed any less tears for the Holocaust.
The only person trying to be 'shocking' here is you. And I don't appreciate it. And I'm sure many people here feel the same way. Save your yellings for 'actual' cases of racism and prejudice. You're only cheapening those by attempting to scream 'racism' when someone asks for their coffee 'black'.
Though I suppose you probably avoid the term "Blue Sc
Re: (Score:2)
What a deal (Score:2, Redundant)
So Microsoft 'owns' LG now, and what does LG get? A lot of hot air, it seems to me.
Re:What a deal (Score:4, Interesting)
Both companies are simply saying we could sue each other but we won't.
How can microsoft claim..... (Score:2, Insightful)
One quick point... (Score:4, Interesting)
Before I get my qwerty in a knot over this, am I not correct in pointing out these covenants and agreements apply only to companies who deal with the U.S.A., while doing business in said state?
Last time I checked, I live elsewhere, my current distro is E.U. based, and my probable future distro is based in the Isle of Man, so why should I care about Americans shooting themselves in the foot?
Re: (Score:2)
good for Linux (Score:2)
In fact, these agreements are so obviously bad for Microsoft that I really wonder when the other shoe will drop.
Re: (Score:2)
I have tried very hard to see some good in this and I believe you're right.
I think also the disgust that these companies may feel after having to cough-up to Microsoft's shake-down shenanigans will be the main driver in them accelerating their migration away from MS products. This will backfire in MS face in the future for sure. It is an act of desparation on the part of Mr Steve Balmer. This guy is vicious and cut-throat. The nightmare for Mr. Balmer Is being caught between a group of angry Tux penguin
Re: (Score:2)
How do you know they did not pay MS? If so then perhaps MS windowsCE might appear cheaper. This is microsofts plan all along.
This is becoming scary .... (Score:3, Interesting)
Is this basically giving Microsoft free access to everyone else's patent portfolio? It's not like they've specifically enumerated which patents are at issue here. So if these companies are signing something which says "I promise never to sue MS for patent infringement", and furthering the belief that open source must be in violation, aren't MS getting a tremendous advantage and leverage over the rest of the industry?
Man I wish the USDOJ hadn't dropped the ball on anti-trust proceedings.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Isn't extortion illigal? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Isn't extortion illigal? (Score:4, Insightful)
Oops. Here, let me fix that for you:
There. That's better.
Haven't we seen this before? (Score:3, Interesting)
http://lwn.net/Articles/73592/ [lwn.net]
The OS Wars (Score:5, Funny)
Debian: We've got to wait it out for reinforments.
Linspire: They killed Private Xandros and Assimilated General SUSE! We've next!
BOOOOOOOOM!
Debian: LG Electronics!
Linspire: They're gone...
Red Hat: (removes his hat)
Ubuntu: (plays a funeral tune on his bugle)
The Royal Nonesuch (Score:2)
#5 Profit (Score:2)
Exactly (Score:2)
The great thing is, you don't actually have to sell someone anything. They'll just hand you money. One of the greatest swindles in history.
So let me get this straight! (Score:2, Interesting)
Hey I want in on This! (Score:2)
get the facts... (Score:2, Insightful)
Linux is not the main topic of the game... but they need the construct
Thanks for playing. (Score:3, Insightful)
It is my money and I care who I give it to.
OK, What's going on here? (Score:4, Interesting)
Perhaps all these deals are to give an aura of legitimacy to their patent claims, enabling them to spread FUD more effectively.
Perhaps they want to get enough people to continue Linux support under GPLv2.
Perhaps it's an attempt to tie Linux to some actual companies, which they can later undercut and drive out of business (which is how they've dealt with their traditional competitors until now, but which hasn't worked against open source.)
Honestly, I haven't been able to figure out what this is about.
Just a thought, what would happen if... (Score:2)
Re:I may be the only one but (Score:5, Funny)
What on Earth are you doing on Slashdot?
Re: (Score:2)
Hi! I think you're on the wrong site. I believe you are looking for digg [digg.com].
Linuzzz? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Isn't it a narcoleptic Linux distribution?
Re: (Score:2)
Nice troll job though...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
For MS, they are actually rising theit contact with the Open Source movement
They've had plenty of contact, in the form of veiled threats, lawsuits, technology theivery, etc. Or, if you prefer my non-(-1: Troll) reply to that statement, I would say: they've been working in and around OS environments for years now.
and this will lead to an integration of their technology (like .net, silverlight and others) to Linuzzz.
I'm missing where that's a Good Thing. Most software in use in the corporate environment is not .NET powered, nor does it need to be. Besides, we already have Mono [google.com]; what exactly are you looking for?
For linuzz, this is actually an oportunity to raise their "status" for Joe Average, that doesn't even know what the hell Linuzzz is. This could also be an opportinity for Linuzzz to get a change to update it's desktop technology and maybe even get a little commercial help.
Yes, because Microsoft is helping get Linux to the end user. That's the p
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The good thing? The same that saying that (for example) is a good thing getting technology X or Z ported to Linuzz (wherever it comes from).
Does not compute. Also, I'm still missing the "Linuzz" thing, but that's beside the point.
It's about what OS advocates tell all the time: about "freedom" (whatever that is).
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html [gnu.org]
.net and silverlight (2 examples from the top of my head) is great technology that can't be ignored and having it ported and fully integrated with Linuzzz is a great options.
I guess you didn't read the link to the Mono Project? And Silverlight is already described by M$ [silverlight.net] as being "cross-platform and cross-browser". What more do you want?!
Some purists like you won't be "contaminated" with anything from Redmond, but non-religious people will be glad with this.
It's not about the Microsoft software. It's about M$ patent bullies trying desperately to destroy free software [fsf.org]. Please don't reply back until you understand what FOSS is about, and why we're against what M$
Re: (Score:2)
frankly I would rather joe average get to know about Linux by doing his own research rather than being spoon fed by Microsoft. In fact, it wouldnt surprise me if all Joe average got from this was that Microsoft is the innovator and Linux is the one behind... it just makes me cringe
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I think "Linuzzz" has the same value as "M$". That is, none.
"Incidentally, show me all the programs/sites in the world using Silverlight. Now show me all the sites in the world using LAMP. Oh, thanks.)"
I make no predictions about how well adopted Silverlight will be vs. LAMP in the future, but SilverLight has been available how long - maybe two months. What was the installed base of Linux in it's first two months? You could at least pretend t
Re: (Score:2)
sounds a lot like a troll but I'll bite. Linus did invent Linux, it isnt merely a clone as you think, it is a completely seperate/distinct OS- in fact there isnt a single line of code from Unix/Min
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
However this only works if your victi - er partner feels they have something to lose. The little guy, however, was the undoing of the Roman empire, and it will be the undoing of Microsoft. Mark my words. And long live the internet.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
How do you know that this has not already occurred? Provides a simple (albeit paranoid) answer to all those holes that let botnets flourish.
Re: (Score:2)
Sounds at least as solid as people licensing MS patents that allegedly cover Linux.