BrainDump
  Home arrow BrainDump arrow Page 4 - Microsoft Continues War on Open Source
FaxWave - Free Trial.
Dev Shed Forums 
Administration  
Apache  
BrainDump  
DHTML  
Flash  
Java  
JavaScript  
Multimedia  
MySQL  
Oracle  
Perl  
PHP  
Practices  
Python  
Reviews  
Security  
Style-Sheets  
Web Services  
XML  
Zend  
Zope  
Forums Sitemap 
IBM® developerWorks 
Dedicated Servers 
E-Commerce Hosting 
Linux Web Hosting 
Managed Hosting 
Small Business Hosting 
Download TestComplete 
VPS Hosting 
Weekly Newsletter

 
Developer Updates  
Free Website Content 
 RSS  Articles
 RSS  Forums
 RSS  All Feeds
Write For Us Get Paid 
Request Media Kit
Contact Us 
Site Map 
Privacy Policy 
Support 
 USERNAME
 
 PASSWORD
 
 
  >>> SIGN UP!  
  Lost Password? 
BRAINDUMP

Microsoft Continues War on Open Source
By: Terri Wells
  • Search For More Articles!
  • Disclaimer
  • Author Terms
  • Rating: 5 stars5 stars5 stars5 stars5 stars / 10
    2007-05-23

    Table of Contents:
  • Microsoft Continues War on Open Source
  • A Changing View of Patents
  • The Open Invention Network
  • Pot, Meet Kettle?

  • Rate this Article: Poor Best 
      ADD THIS ARTICLE TO:
      Del.ici.ous Digg
      Blink Simpy
      Google Spurl
      Y! MyWeb Furl
    Email Me Similar Content When Posted
    Add Developer Shed Article Feed To Your Site
    Email Article To Friend
    Print Version Of Article
    PDF Version Of Article
     
     
     
    ADVERTISEMENT

    PCmover - $15 Off with Coupon Code CJPH7Q

    Microsoft Continues War on Open Source - Pot, Meet Kettle?
    (Page 4 of 4 )

    Before you get too excited about the 100 or so patents owned by the OIN, keep in mind that Microsoft owns literally thousands of patents. It won't reveal the specific ones being infringed because it figures that free and open source software advocates will begin filing challenges to them. All of which raises the question: is Microsoft itself infringing software patents?

    The deal hammered out in November of last year between Microsoft and Novell hints at that possibility. The two companies agreed not to sue each other's customers for patent infringements, then worked out complicated revenue and marketing collaboration deals that included a $108 million "balancing payment" from Microsoft to Novell to cover patents.

    Both Novell and Microsoft were mum at the time about whether the deal indicated that any patents were infringed. David Kaefer, the director of business development for intellectual property and licensing at Microsoft, said that "For the same reasons that Novell will not say if there are any Microsoft patents they infringe, Microsoft is not going to come out and admit that it has a set of products that infringe Novell's patents."

    So is Microsoft vulnerable in court? At the end of the Fortune article, Steve Ballmer was asked if his company would sue its customers for royalties if it really came down to the wire. "That's not a bridge we've crossed," he replied, "and not a bridge I want to cross today on the phone with you." To me, that sounds like neither money nor principle are on the line, but market share; it's the kind of response you would expect from someone who can't afford to lose goodwill.

    The larger point is that Microsoft was hoping to do deals similar to the one it made with Novell with other large open source software distributors, such as Red Hat. Indeed, Ashlee Vance of The Register thinks the whole point of the piece in Fortune was "to remind Red Hat that it will need to go ahead and strike a deal like Novell." As Vance correctly pointed out, however, Red Hat may not be the company Microsoft should worry about most when it comes to open source software. "Close partners such as IBM and HP - companies with more than ample patent portfolios - would not sit idly by as Microsoft tried to derail their lucrative Linux server businesses." And it's knowing just how convoluted a set of mutually-assured-destruction patent lawsuits could get that will keep this from ending up in the courtroom.


    DISCLAIMER: The content provided in this article is not warranted or guaranteed by Developer Shed, Inc. The content provided is intended for entertainment and/or educational purposes in order to introduce to the reader key ideas, concepts, and/or product reviews. As such it is incumbent upon the reader to employ real-world tactics for security and implementation of best practices. We are not liable for any negative consequences that may result from implementing any information covered in our articles or tutorials. If this is a hardware review, it is not recommended to open and/or modify your hardware.

       · Thanks for reading my article. The view I've been seeing from analysts lately is...
     

       

    BRAINDUMP ARTICLES

    - Outsourcing: the Hoopla, the Reality
    - MySQL Plays in the Sun
    - All About SQL Functions
    - SQL: Functioning in the Real World
    - More Advanced SQL Statements
    - Beginning SQL the SEQUEL: Working with Advan...
    - Beginning SQL
    - A Look at the VI Editor
    - A Quick Tour of Boo
    - Book Review: Open Source Licensing
    - PGP and GPG: Email for the Practical Parano...
    - Microsoft Continues War on Open Source
    - Secure Remote Desktop Sharing with VNC on Li...
    - A Look at Google Project Hosting
    - What we can Learn from Two Linux vs. Microso...

     
    Accelerating Trading Partner Performance
     
    Competing on Analytics
     
    Cost Effective Scaling with Virtualization and Coyote Point Systems
     
    Five Checkpoints to Implementing IP Telephony
     
    Hosted Email Security: Staying Ahead of New Threats
     




    © 2003-2008 by Developer Shed. All rights reserved. DS Cluster 4 hosted by Hostway