EditorsAbout the SiteComes vs. MicrosoftUsing This Web SiteSite ArchivesCredibility IndexOOXMLOpenDocumentPatentsNovellNews DigestSite NewsRSS

01.30.09

Microsoft on Intel’s Anti-Linux: “Please Keep Confidential. This is a Nightmare”

Posted in Antitrust, Bill Gates, GNU/Linux, Hardware, Kernel, Microsoft, Steve Ballmer, Windows at 3:10 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Microsoft retaliates against Intel in order to abolish GNU/Linux

Intel

IN previous E-mails that reveal Microsoft’s fight against Linux at Intel, Bill Gates called it a "Jihad". This is a furious battle that Microsoft secretly had going against Intel’s support for Linux. This was so secret that Microsoft executives even abstained from telling their peers about it. “Please keep confidential. this is a nightmare…,” wrote Bill Veghte for example. There was great caution there because someone could lose a job over the mischief (leak), which Brian Valentine was eventually allowed to know about.

Let’s take this one small step at a time and handle this chronologically using the 3 exhibits we have at hand (full texts appended at the bottom). We start with Exhibit px06782 (June-July 2000) [PDF].

Joachim Kempin writes to people up at the top, namely Bill Gates and David Heiner. He states that:

As I mentioned at the retreat we have a huge problem with Intel going against us with Linux.

This is said in reference to the news that Intel is investing $100,000,000 in development that involves Linux.

This issue was not brought up by Joachim Kempin (OEM chief) however. It also involved familiar names like Steve Ballmer and Bill Veghte. This exhibit, while heavily redacted (what’s so confidential that it must be hidden from the courts?), does show Bill Veghte’s nervousness where he says:

Please keep confidential. this is a nightmare…

This whole thing came through Bill Veghte who spotted a CNET article. Tom Phillips, who reported to Veghte (probably his boss) and Kim Akers from the Windows team, writes:

Yes, but we need to be incredibly sensitive with this data. It was disclosed with extreme
concern. If Mary finds out that we know, someone will loose their job at Compaq who is
very helpful to MSFT.

Who is Mary? And who is that someone from Compaq (now part of H-P) who is “very helpful to MSFT”? Does Microsoft have ‘insiders’ in other companies? Companies that are intended — at least by their very nature — to focus mostly on hardware and remain impartial with only their own goals in mind? Is Compaq trying to accomplish the same things as Microsoft? The current collusion with Intel is a crime which Microsoft might be forced to pay billions in remedy for. At a later stage, we will present detailed antitrust evidence about Compaq and Microsoft.

Anyway, why would someone “lose their job”? It sure smells like some form of violation of ethics, if not a violation of the law.

It is explained a little earlier (by Tom Phillips) that:

According to Compaq insiders, the money is targeted at Enterprise and ISP/ASP Sun systems, where Intel will provide a stipend to Compaq $20MM for the efforts necessary to insure that these are Linux based IA32 (and eventually IA64) based sales. Compaq stated that it would rather vector the business to Windows, but that was not an option with Intel.

So Intel insists against Windows (we saw this before). Microsoft feels as though it needs to respond or retaliate.

We move on in time (just days/weeks) and find Exhibit px06791 (July 2000) [PDF]. Bill Veghte writes to Bill Gates, Neil Calvin, Mike Porter, Robbie Bach, Brian Valentine, Bob McBreen, Peyton Smith, Tom Phillips, and Thomas Koll. Here is the punch:

We do have some damage control to do with them and we are going to have to work hard to change the direction they are going down particularly in sw investments around Linux.

So a whole team from Microsoft flew all the way to ensure that Linux receives no investments? Well, since Jim Allchin sees a "huge threat" in Linux and feels "scared" of it, maybe all of this is predictable.

Here is the bit about Intel and Linux:

As a sidenote, I probed hard with John on how hard Intel was pushing Linux in general. I came away pretty convinced that these are not the guys that I was hitting with our OEMs here and the Far East (Bill/Steveb: if you have not read the piece of mail BrianV sent you last week on Intel and Linux, please do so). John’s guys are focused on the networking and telecommunications space and these were not companies or groups that I have been talking with. My bet is that it is coming from Mike Fister’s org.

In this message, for the uninitiated, “Bill” is Bill Gates, “Steveb” is Steve Ballmer and “BrianV” is Brian Valentine, who is now doing his damage from inside Amazon [1, 2]. He also corrupted analysts for anti-Linux studies.

Here is another bit about Linux where Tom Phillips is assigned to handle it.

We have the model in place based on our design wins at Dell and Compaq and in my opinion, we should be just as aggressive on price as we were with Dell. The two other appliance efforts that we will engage on are small business server (I talked at a conceptual level about Central service and Intel, with the WEN product and they liked the idea) and provisioning server. They were particularly enthusiastic about the provisioning server. We should engage in dialog but this will be a lively internal debate about whether we move to an appliance solution/strategy for this. This group is where there Linux Investment Is heaviest In my opinion and can cause us the most pain. TomPh will take the lead here.

More on Linux here:

–> Network devices group: Most of their stuff is on VXWorks today. They are doing some stuff in Linux and looking at Win2k. We need to accelerate this evaluation and where appropriate get them on board if there is real business here They aren’t particularly happy with vxworks so we should also think about them on WinCE with an aggressive source license.

This whole message was sent in reply to “Intel call – Paul Ottelini”. The message is omitted from the exhibit (“Privileged”), but this was sent from Bill Gates to Neil Calvin, Mike Porter, Robbie Bach, Brian Valentine, Bill Veghte, Bob McBreen. Copies were also sent to Kate Sako, Dan Crouse, Steve Ballmer, Joachim Kempin, Paul Maritzm, Eric Rudder, Bill Neukom, and Carl Stark.

Finally, we have this third exhibit, Exhibit px03112 (August 2000) [PDF]. It’s about Intel and it was sent from Joachim Kempin to Bill Gates. It’s utterly disgusting, but then again, Joachim Kempin was arrested for illegally shooting (and killing) antelopes for leisure, so phrases like “I am thinking of putting hitting the OEM harder than in the past with anti Linux actions” are by no means surprising. One person who used to work for Joachim Kempin told me about his strong accent and very hard stance, indicating that this is an unpleasant person. Anyway, here is his message to Bill Gates, in full (exhibit as a whole in Appendix C).

I have been trying to gather some background info. The more I dig in it becomes clear that Intel is connecting with all the UNIX groups inside the large OEMs who are not MS friendly in the first place and are encouraging them to go to Linux-which they call a unified UNIX(which seems stupid even to me)
they throw promotional funds at them to develop new devices based on this OS and are encouraging Itanium work by asking the OEMs to adopt their own apps(middle ware) and encourage some of their key ISVs to do so.
Some of the money is INTEL inside money- the just go beyond the normal rates or qualify Linux adds under the same scheme.
Some OEMs are telling me that the total outlay for Intel is between 100-200M$ year-but there is no hard data for the total amount. Siemens told me they were offered 5-6M$ for this 6 months ago and I know that they funded a netdevice in NEC and made approx. 10M$ available.
I have been sending for some time mail with this info and mentioned it during our exec retreat. The hard part is the answer- in one way we are married to them on the other hand they are destroying the basis for the marriage. To play this the hard way would prob cause more damage than we need and get more attention than we need. On the OEM side I am thinking of putting hitting the OEM harder than in the past with anti Linux actions, in addition I will stop any go-to-market activities with Intel and only work with their competitors (something which is easy to do because they normally put crazy demands on us).

Is that not extortion or blackmail? They pressure Intel with some sort of an embargo — the ransom being that they drop Linux. They use companies like AMD as a bargaining card against software competitors. On it carries:

For the rest of the company this is harder. I have been complaining that we have no real Linux watch-dog group in MS, a lot of people have some ideas and actions around this but nobody is really responsible- I will establish this for OEM, may be we should do it for the company as well.

Yes, Microsoft has a “Linux watch-dog group”. Sounds like one of those “attack groups” Microsoft casually refers to [1, 2]. More recently, Microsoft has been calling these "taskforces" (against Linux).

I do not think you can do more than explaining what that Linux is bad for Intel, let’s leave it there and do as they do- work underground with the clear understanding to promote and advantage the guys with less market share without declaring our strategy.
I would further try to restrict source code deliveries where possible and be less gracious when interpreting agreements- again without being obvious about it. The last thing we need need is them shutting us down- so this will have to be a delicate dance. But openess with them and sharing our real plans should not longer be done- they are not doing it either.

Sorry, Joachim. “Sharing our real plans” is now done. It’s out there for people to see the behaviour you engage in with Bill Gates’ endorsement.

3 appendices follow.


Appendix A: Comes vs. Microsoft – exhibit px06782, as text



From: Joachim Kempin
Sent: Monday, July 03, 2000 1:31 PM
To: Bill Gates; David Heiner (LCA)
Subject: Attorney/Client Privileged

Privileged

-----Original Message-----

From: Bill Gates
Sent: Monday, July 03, 2000 10:19 AM
To: Joachim Kempin
Subject: FW: CNET.com - News - Enterprise Computing - Intel to spend $100
million on assist

As I mentioned at the retreat we have a huge problem with Intel going against us with
Linux.

Not sure why they are doing this.

-----Original Message-----
From: Brian Valentine
Sent: Friday, June 30, 2000 5:52 PM
To:   Bill Gates; Steve Ballmer; Carl Stork; Bill Veghte; David Heiner (LCA)
Subject:       FW: CNET.com - News - Enterprise Computing - Intel to spend $100 million on
assist

Attorney/Client Privileged - Don't forward.

Privileged

                    1

Plaintiff's Exhibit
6782
____________
Comes v. Microsoft

MS-CC-MDL 000000396175
HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL



Privileged

-----Original Message-----
From: Bill Veghte
Sent: Friday, June 30, 2000 5:31 PM
To:     Brian Valentine
Cc:     Tom Phillips
Subject:       FW: CNET.com - News - Enterprise Computing - Intel to spend
      $100 million on assista

Please keep confidential.     this is a nightmare...

-----Original Message-----
From: Tom Phillips
Sent: Tuesday, June 27, 2000 10:33 PM
To:     Bill Veghte; Kim Akers (WINDOWS)
Sub3ect:       RE: CNET.com - News - Enterprise Computing - Intel to spend
      $100 million on assista

Yes, but we need to be incredibly sensitive with this data. It was disclosed with extreme
concern. If Mary finds out that we know, someone will loose their job at Compaq who is
very helpful to MSFT.
Thanks,
Tom

-----Original Message-----
From: Bill Veghte
Sent: Tuesday, June 27, 2000 10:22 PM
To:   Tom Phillips; Kim Akezs (WINDOWS)
Subject:       RE: CNET.com - News - Enterprise Computing - Intel to spend
      $100 million on assista

may I forward to BrianV?

-----Original Message-----
From: Tom Phillips
Sent: Tuesday, June 27, 2000 9:55 PM
To:     Bill Veghte; Kim Akers (WINDOWS)
Subject:       RE: CNET.com - News - Enterprise Computing - Intel to spend
      $i00 million on assista

CONFIDENTIAL | PLEASE DO NOT FORWARD
According to Compaq insiders, the money is targeted at Enterprise and ISP/ASP Sun systems,
where Intel will provide a stipend to Compaq $20MM for the efforts necessary to insure
that these are Linux based IA32 (and eventually IA64) based sales. Compaq stated that it
would rather vector the business to Windows, but that was not an option with Intel.

                    2

MS-CC-MDL 000000396176
HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL



Thanks,
Tom

-----Original Message-----
From: Bill Veghte
Sent: Tuesday, June 27, 2000 8:53 PM
To:    Tom Phillips; Kim Akers (WINDOWS)
Subject:      CNET.com - News - Enterprise Computing - Intel to spend $100
       million on assista

we need to make sure this does not impact our server appliance partnerships if at all.

http://news.cnet.com/news/O-1OO3-200-2156395.html

                    3

MS-CC-MDL 000000396177
HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL


Appendix B: Comes vs. Microsoft – exhibit px06791, as text


……………………………………………………………………………

From: Bill Veghte
Sent: Tuesday, July 11,2000 11:15 PM
To: Bill Gates; Neil Calvin (LCA); Mike Porter; Robert (Robbie) Bach; Brian Valentine; Bob
McBreen; Peyton Smith; Tom Phillips: Thomas Koll
Cc: Kate Sako (LCA); Dan Crouse (LCA); Steve Ballmer, Joachim Kempin; Paul Maritz; Eric
Rudder; Bill Neukom (LCA): Carl Stork; Davld Thompson (NT); Kin Akers (WINDOWS)
Subject: RE: Intel call – Paul Ottelini

Today Mike Porter, TomPh, Kim Akers, myself and folks from NSG flew down to meet with John Minor and his direct reports to get a state of the union on both sides.

Net, net, this group has gone off in a bunch of directions in the networking and communications space that does not track nearly as well as it could with MS efforts. There is frustration on both sides over this and we will need to do a couple more face to faces to get it back on track. (MikePo: chime in if you think I missed anything or misrepresent), I haven’t worked with John Minor before but he is quite a character to deal with. He opened the meeting, blustering a lot about our lack of action, painful licensing terms, terrible pricing, and poor technology and we went from there. He closed saying it looked like we were moving in the right direction but he would remain constructively skeptical until he saw the different groups closing some deals. John aside, his guys seemed pretty reasonable and there was a good sense of the opportunity and specific action items as we wrapped up. We do have some damage control to do with them and we are going to have to work hard to change the direction they are going down particularly in sw investments around Linux.

In general, we need to think about John and his team more like an OEM than a silicon vendor. They will push us very, very hard on price point, licensing terms, and cooperative marketing together. I think we are going to have to be willing to be a more aggressive with them or walk away from them. I don’t think there is a middle ground with this group. They don’t value our partnership particularly highly right now based on the track record of the last 18 months.I have attached a bunch of the details below and specific action items for Jawad’s folks, Peyton. and Joachim/Thomas, MikePo, and my team.

As a sidenote, I probed hard with John on how hard Intel was pushing Linux in general. I came away pretty convinced that these are not the guys that I was hitting with our OEMs here and the Far East (Bill/Steveb: if you have not read the piece of mail BrianV sent you last week on Intel and Linux, please do so). John’s guys are focused on the networking and telecommunications space and these were not companies or groups that I have been talking with. My bet is that it is coming from Mike Fister’s org.

Details:
-> John has 3400 people in his group. 1100 of whom he claimed were software engineers.
-> They were surprisingly unfamiliar with our networking and communications roadmap and how much progress we had made in Win2k even in things like TCP/IP stack. With Jawed out, I am not convinced sending Gurdeep down there is the right thing to do but we need to get them up to speed on the investments we are making. At a minimum, Jawad should visit Jn the first couple of weeks he is back.
—> John has four different teams; a communications building blocks group that is doing things like the call control work, the communications/server appliance group, the network devices group and a services/support group. In terms of interacting with each group. Peyton/Thomas, I think you take the lead on the first group, TomPh will own engagement with the communications/server appliance group, and the network devices group, Peyton, we should talk about because it wasn’t clear to me how much upside to MS there is engaging in dialog around.

Specific details on engagement with the three key teams ….
–> Communications Infrastructure team (not sure I have the name right but it is Howard Bubb’s group) I don’t have all the history between this group and MS but it is pretty clear that we have managed to drift pretty far apart thru Vathalla/Dialogic and the time is now to resuscitate. Peyton/Thomas, I think you guys should follow-up particularly with Howard Bubb and John to make sure we are clear on the messaging of our communications platform efforts. This probably means a face to face. Maurice is going to send a separate piece of mail on but they unloaded on me on how we weren’t being clear on our messaging about the opportunities for Win2k as a communications development platform. We have some damage control do do here.

–> Comrnunications/Server Appliances Group: We will engage with Scott’s team and go out and try and win a couple of server appliance design wins. I want us to focus first on the web blade, treating them like an OEM which is what they

1

Plaintiff’s Exhibit
6791
…..
Comes V. Microsoft

MS-CC-MDL 000000396186
HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL


are in this case. We have the model in place based on our design wins at Dell and Compaq and in my opinion, we should be just as aggressive on price as we were with Dell. The two other appliance efforts that we will engage on are small business server (I talked at a conceptual level about Central service and Intel, with the WEN product and they liked the idea) and provisioning server. They were particularly enthusiastic about the provisioning server. We should engage in dialog but this will be a lively internal debate about whether we move to an appliance solution/strategy for this. This group is where there Linux Investment Is heaviest In my opinion and can cause us the most pain. TomPh will take the lead here.

–> Network devices group: Most of their stuff is on VXWorks today. They are doing some stuff in Linux and looking at Win2k. We need to accelerate this evaluation and where appropriate get them on board if there is real business here They aren’t particularly happy with vxworks so we should also think about them on WinCE with an aggressive source license.

—–Original Message—–
From: Bill Gates
Sent: Tuesday, July 11, 2800 2:09 PM
To: Neil Calvin (LCA); Mike Porter; Robert (Robbie) Bach; Brian Valentine; Bill Veghte; Bob McBreen
Cc: Kate Sako (LCA); Dan Crouse (LCA); Steve Ballmer; Joachim Kempin; Paul Maritz; Eric Rudder; Bill Neukom (LCA); Carl Stark
Subject: Intel call – Paul Ottelini

Privileged

2

MS-CC-MDL 000000396187
HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL


Privileged

3

MS-CC-MDL 000000396188
HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL


Appendix C: Comes vs. Microsoft – exhibit px03112, as text


……………………………………………………………………………………………..
—Original Message—
From: Joachim Kempin
Sent: Monday, August 14, 2000 1:57 PM
To: Bill Gates
Cc: Mike Porter, Carl Stork
Subject: Intel

I have been trying to gather some background info. The more I dig in it becomes clear that Intel is connecting with all the UNIX groups inside the large OEMs who are not MS friendly in the first place and are encouraging them to go to Linux-which they call a unified UNIX(which seems stupid even to me)
they throw promotional funds at them to develop new devices based on this OS and are encouraging Itanium work by asking the OEMs to adopt their own apps(middle ware) and encourage some of their key ISVs to do so.
Some of the money is INTEL inside money- the just go beyond the normal rates or qualify Linux adds under the same scheme.
Some OEMs are telling me that the total outlay for Intel is between 100-200M$ year-but there is no hard data for the total amount. Siemens told me they were offered 5-6M$ for this 6 months ago and I know that they funded a netdevice in NEC and made approx. 10M$ available.
I have been sending for some time mail with this info and mentioned it during our exec retreat. The hard part is the answer- in one way we are married to them on the other hand they are destroying the basis for the marriage. To play this the hard way would prob cause more damage than we need and get more attention than we need. On the OEM side I am thinking of putting hitting the OEM harder than in the past with anti Linux actions, in addition I will stop any go-to-market activities with Intel and only work with their competitors (something which is easy to do because they normally put crazy demands on us). For the rest of the company this is harder. I have been complaining that we have no real Linux watch-dog group in MS, a lot of people have some ideas and actions around this but nobody is really responsible- I will establish this for OEM, may be we should do it for the company as well. I do not think you can do more than explaining what that Linux is bad for Intel, let’s leave it there and do as they do- work underground with the clear understanding to promote and advantage the guys with less market share without declaring our strategy.
I would further try to restrict source code deliveries where possible and be less gracious when interpreting agreements- again without being obvious about it. The last thing we need need is them shutting us down- so this will have to be a delicate dance. But openess with them and sharing our real plans should not longer be done- they are not doing it either.

PLAINTIFF’S
EXHIBIT
276

MS010049218
HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL


Thanks to cday for help with this post

Share this post: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Reddit
  • co.mments
  • DZone
  • email
  • Google Bookmarks
  • LinkedIn
  • NewsVine
  • Print
  • Technorati
  • TwitThis
  • Facebook

If you liked this post, consider subscribing to the RSS feed or join us now at the IRC channels.

Pages that cross-reference this one

A Single Comment

  1. Raz said,

    January 31, 2009 at 6:53 am

    Gravatar

    ..Damn. And here I thought Microsoft was a snuggly people-oriented family business. Turns out it’s just another soulless corporation willing to do anything to make a buck.

    My faith in big business has been irreparably shattered – and that’s why we’re in the middle of a global confidence crisis. See what you did?? >_

What Else is New


  1. Links 23/4/2018: Second RC of Linux 4.17 and First RC of Mesa 18.1

    Links for the day



  2. The Good Work of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) and the Latest Attempts to Undermine It

    A week's roundup of news about PTAB, which is eliminating many bad (wrongly-granted) patents and is therefore becoming "enemy number one" to those who got accustomed to blackmailing real (productive) firms with their questionable patents



  3. District Courts' Patent Cases, Including the Eastern District of Texas (EDTX/TXED), in a Nutshell

    A roundup of patent cases in 'low courts' of the United States, where patents are being reasoned about or objected to while patent law firms make a lot of money



  4. The Federal Circuit's (CAFC) Decisions Are Being Twisted by Patent Propaganda Sites Which Merely Cherry-Pick Cases With Outcomes That Suit Them

    The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) continues to reject the vast majority of software patents, citing Section 101 in many such cases, but the likes of Managing IP, Patently-O, IAM and Watchtroll only selectively cover such cases (instead they’re ‘pulling a Berkheimer’ or some similar name-dropping)



  5. Patents Roundup: Metaswitch, GENBAND, Susman, Cisco, Konami, High 5 Games, HTC, and Nintendo

    A look at existing legal actions, the application of 35 U.S.C. § 101, and questionable patents that are being pursued on software (algorithms or "software infrastructure")



  6. In Maxon v Funai the High 'Patent Court' (CAFC) Reaffirms Disdain for Software Patents, Which Are Nowadays Harder to Get and Then Defend

    With the wealth of decisions from the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) wherein software patents get discarded (Funai being the latest example), the public needs to ask itself whether patent law firms are honest when they make claims about resurgence of software patents by 'pulling a Berkheimer' or coming up with terms like “Berkheimer Effect”



  7. Today's European Patent Office Works for Patent Extremists and for Team UPC Rather Than for Europe or for Innovation

    The International Association for the Protection of Intellectual Property (AIPPI) and other patent maximalists who have nothing to do with Europe, helped by a malicious and rather clueless politician called Benoît Battistelli, are turning the EPO into a patent-printing machine rather than an examination office as envisioned by the EPC (founders) and member states



  8. The EPO is Dying and Those Who Have Killed It Are Becoming Very Rich in the Process

    Following the footsteps of Ron Hovsepian at Novell, Battistelli at the EPO (along with Team Battistelli) may mean the end of the EPO as we know it (or the end altogether); one manager and a cabal of confidants make themselves obscenely rich by basically sacrificing the very organisation they were entrusted to serve



  9. Short: Just Keep Repeating the Lie (“Quality”) Until People Might Believe It

    Battistelli’s patent-printing bureau (EPO without quality control) keeps lying about the quality of patents by repeating the word “quality” a lot of times, including no less than twice in the summary alone



  10. Shelston IP Keeps Pressuring IP Australia to Allow Software Patents and Harm Software Development

    Shelston IP wants exactly the opposite of what's good for Australia; it just wants what's good for itself, yet it habitually pretends to speak for a productive industry (nothing could be further from the truth)



  11. Is Andy Ramer's Departure the End of Cantor Fitzgerald's Patent Trolls-Feeding Operations and Ambitions?

    The managing director of the 'IP' group at Cantor Fitzgerald is leaving, but it does not yet mean that patent trolls will be starved/deprived access to patents



  12. EPO Hoards Billions of Euros (Taken From the Public), Decreases Quality to Get More Money, Reduces Payments to Staff

    The EPO continues to collect money from everyone, distributes bogus/dubious patents that usher patent trolls into Europe (to cost European businesses billions in the long run), and staff of the EPO faces more cuts while EPO management swims in cash and perks



  13. Short: Calling Battistelli's Town (Where He Works) “Force for Innovation” to Justify the Funneling of EPO Funds to It

    How the EPO‘s management ‘explained’ (or sought to rationalise) to staff its opaque decision to send a multi-million, one-day ceremony to Battistelli’s own theatre only weeks before he leaves



  14. Short: EPO Bribes the Media and Then Brags About the Paid-for Outcome to Staff

    The EPO‘s systematic corruption of the media at the expense of EPO stakeholders — not to mention hiring of lawyers to bully media which exposes EPO corruption — in the EPO’s own words (amended by us)



  15. Short: EPO's “Working Party for Quality” is to Quality What the “Democratic People's Republic of Korea” is to Democracy

    To maintain the perception (illusion) that the EPO still cares about patent quality — and in order to disseminate this lie to EPO staff — a puff piece with the above heading/photograph was distributed to thousands of examiners in glossy paper form



  16. Short: This Spring's Message From the EPO's President (Corrected)

    A corrected preface from the Liar in Chief, the EPO's notoriously crooked and dishonest President



  17. Short: Highly Misleading and Unscientific Graphics From the EPO for an Illusion of Growth

    A look at the brainwash that EPO management is distributing to staff and what's wrong with it



  18. Short: EPO Explains to Examiners Why They Should and Apparently Can Grant Software Patents (in Spite of EPC)

    Whether it calls it "CII" or "ICT" or "Industry 4.0" or "4IR", the EPO's management continues to grant software patents and attempts to justify this to itself (and to staff)



  19. Links 21/4/2018: Linux 4.9.95, FFmpeg 4.0, OpenBSD Foundation 2018 Fundraising Campaign

    Links for the day



  20. As USPTO Director, Andrei Iancu Gives Three Months for Public Comments on 35 U.S.C. § 101 (Software Patenting Impacted)

    Weeks after starting his job as head of the US patent office, to our regret but not to our surprise, Iancu asks whether to limit examiners' ability to reject abstract patent applications citing 35 U.S.C. § 101 (relates to Alice and Mayo)



  21. In Keith Raniere v Microsoft Both Sides Are Evil But for Different Reasons

    Billing for patent lawyers reveals an abusive strategy from Microsoft, which responded to abusive patent litigation (something which Microsoft too has done for well over a decade)



  22. Links 20/4/2018: Atom 1.26, MySQL 8.0

    Links for the day



  23. Links 19/4/2018: Mesa 17.3.9 and 18.0.1, Trisquel 8.0 LTS Flidas, Elections for openSUSE Board

    Links for the day



  24. The Patent Microcosm, Patent Trolls and Their Pressure Groups Incite a USPTO Director Against the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) and Section 101/Alice

    As one might expect, the patent extremists continue their witch-hunt and constant manipulation of USPTO officials, whom they hope to compel to become patent extremists themselves (otherwise those officials are defamed, typically until they're fired or decide to resign)



  25. Microsoft's Lobbying for FRAND Pays Off as Microsoft-Connected Patent Troll Conversant (Formerly MOSAID) Goes After Android OEMs in Europe

    The FRAND (or SEP) lobby seems to have caused a lot of monopolistic patent lawsuits; this mostly affects Linux-powered platforms such as Android, Tizen and webOS and there are new legal actions from Microsoft-connected patent trolls



  26. To Understand Why People Say That Lawyers are Liars Look No Further Than Misleading Promotion of Software Patents

    Some of the latest misleading claims from the patent microcosm, which is only interested in lots and lots of patents (its bread and butter is monopolies after all) irrespective of their merit, quality, and desirability



  27. When News About the EPO is Dominated by Sponsored 'Reports' and Press Releases Because Publishers Are Afraid of (or Bribed by) the EPO

    The lack of curiosity and genuine journalism in Europe may mean that serious abuses (if not corruption) will go unreported



  28. The Boards of Appeal at the European Patent Organisation (EPO) Complain That They Are Understaffed, Not Just Lacking the Independence They Depend on

    The Boards of Appeal have released a report and once again they openly complain that they're unable to do their job properly, i.e. patent quality cannot be assured



  29. Links 18/4/2018: New Fedora 27 ISOs, Nextcloud Wins German Government Contract

    Links for the day



  30. Guest Post: Responding to Your Recent Posting “The European Patent Office Will Never Hold Its Destroyers Accountable”

    In France, where Battistelli does not enjoy diplomatic immunity, he can be held accountable like his "padrone" recently was


CoPilotCo

RSS 64x64RSS Feed: subscribe to the RSS feed for regular updates

Home iconSite Wiki: You can improve this site by helping the extension of the site's content

Home iconSite Home: Background about the site and some key features in the front page

Chat iconIRC Channel: Come and chat with us in real time

CoPilotCo

Recent Posts