I just read this article that was posted over at digg.com and all I can say is:

WTF?

Anyone have any thoughts on the article?


http://digg.com/linux_unix/Linux_V [...] _Microsoft

here is the direct link to the article on CNN in case the other link is down from too many digg users.

http://money.cnn.com/magazines/for [...] 100033867/

-Zorak

I have several comments on that:

1- If so - why isn't Microsoft suing? claiming is one thing - proofing is another. Adding to that - I just wonder if they took the pure kernel or the whole open source of a certain distro - I bet they might find some violations because some of the OSS (open source software) is actually written by the community who doesn't know/doesn't give shit about patents. so "linux" in this case needs to be defined.

2- If so - why would Microsoft |make friends| with Novel? wouldn't it be easier to threaten with a law suit and get whatever they want from the poor company (poor compared to M$)

3- Some would say that Devil also deserves a lawyer - I say burn both...
M$ violated many patents, they only buy off the company that owns the patent when they discover it. so let them rot in hell...
I don't give a shit

Didn't Microsoft just team up with Novell What a way to stab a partner in the back!

Microsoft sue users, yeah, I'd like to see them try

If they try to sue me, I will scan an image of my ass and send it to their lawyers.

-Zorak

This is a pretty good article about the situation http://www.linux-watch.com/news/NS6670466370.html

The links to other articles are good as well.

wooo
are you sure you wanna do that?
I hear lawyers love young ass

Part of their argument goes way back when they had lawsuits against anyone who could convert docs to/from Excel/Word. That was a few years back and OpenOffice was on their list. OpenOffice is again on that list. I don't think you'll see too many actual lawsuits against anyone but the big guys because it's just not cost effective, as MS found out in the past.

Microsoft has found their way to strike at Linux.

One trend in patent development is building up a store of ammunition in case you get sued for patent infringement. Then you can look at your portfolio and use it to defend yourself by attacking the other company. Microsoft has probably done this quite a bit when they can.

The problem is, GNU/Linux doesn't have any patents to use for defense and the vendors probably aren't very patent heavy either.

At the end of the day, I think Microsoft is trying to control Linux. They are making Linux more expensive to purchase if they manage to get royalties from for profit companies that distribute it. They could also end up giving Novell an advantage in the marketplace, as their agreements may cover this sort of thing.

Unbelievable. I refrained from hitting submit a second time when the page hung and I stilf got a double post.

naaaaa...
Let's assume that the false claim the Linux has several patents violated is true, M$ won't be able to do anything for several reasons anyways:

1- you say that Linux doesn't have big patents - ehem - why then have a deal with novel? M$ wants to use some of NOVEL's patents (it wouldn't surprise me if they wanted to buy the company - but then M$ would shoot itself in the foot as it will then admit that Linux is superior to it's different Windows versions. in other words, buying novel might prove to be technologically beneficial but strategically - PR wise - harmful ... so they buy the right to use only patents...)

2- are they going to sue the big guys? well let's see - M$ sue RedHat for patents and this forces RedHad to sell it's server edition a few $ more: do you think that this would hurt RedHat? well... NO - companies will still buy it for a few $ more! but will this hurt M$? YES!
a- PR: the world is already full of hate of M$ ways... this will add some fuel to it.
b- This will likely push Linux Companies like RedHat dig into their and M$ system to discover some patents M$ is violating: who do you think will pay more then?
3- M$ has no control or whatsoever over the open versions - even if they want to sue they have no one to sue - it's free anyways - and they will pay big time lawyers and big time professionals to prove that a free version of linux is kicking their but and they want them to pay? ya right - good luck!

I see the titles right now:
M$ puts its head in its own ass

1) They're putting an option out there. Who wants to build a business model around Linux when they know they can get their behind sued for patent infringement? Ouch. That right there kills off Linux for a while until new technologies can do the same as what MS has patented. Smart move by MS.
MS will also come out and say their patents are also worth X amount of money. That alone would make the server version expensive and help out MS. People who hate MS are going to continue hating MS. Those who like MS will continue liking MS. The status quo remains unchanged at the end of the day. In the end, it all benefits MS. After all, they are a business, Linux isn't.

2) MS has no control of the open versions. That's the issue. Wouldn't it be great if everyone in the world worked for free and everyone got what they wanted? Eventually people who write stuff for Linux will demand money or compensation if Linux grows to dominate a larger market. People will need to be paid. For Linux to succeed, a business model MUST form. Item #1 above ensures it will not.

Linux has reached its full potential for now.

Only people I know that like M$ are people that didn't pay for the software

Riser is our official Pro-M$ poster

You miss the point. MS has been sued in the past for patent infringement. They just paid off the aggrieved parties. You stand as much chance of MS being in Patent breach as you do Linux, just that having purchased the product you have protected liability.

SCO had a go at us and they have a huge MS investment behind them (it was 25% back when I used to be involved with them). The last bits of this case are about to be dismissed. I think it might be good to get this out of the way and clear up the issue once and for all.

MS is driven by Money, Linux is driven by passion. In a fight I know which I'll back.

Slight update. No big surprise to most of us im sure

" Microsoft Will Not Sue Over Linux Patents"
http://yro.slashdot.org/yro/07/05/22/1224259.shtml

the original article is here
http://www.zdnetasia.com/news/soft [...] 865,00.htm

I'm unsure of patent laws so forgive the ignorance, but if your aware of a patent infringement is there a responsibility to report or to pursue the matter ? - Don't misunderstand me, i dont for one minute buy this FUD from MS.

Yeah, I'm sure MS has somewhere patent infringements. Nothing with Linux since they never went out and patented anything.

MS has been able to pay off and put out royalities to those companies.

Linux is driven by passion. Microsoft by money. Remember, Microsoft at first started off as passion and had to progress into a business model to achieve money to finance that passion on a large scale.

Linux is at the same point that MS DOS was when Gates started off. The problem is no one is stepping up with Linux because they don't want to charge money.

Linux will not, can not succeed on passion alone. Nothing in this world works for free. Developers will soon want money.

MS makes a product with a business model around it. Companies make lots of money off this. Mi