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

03.11.09

Bruce Perens Calls Novell a “Highly Paid [Microsoft] Mouthpiece”

Posted in Free/Libre Software, GNU/Linux, Microsoft, Mono, Novell, OSI, Patents, TomTom at 1:07 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Ron Hovsepian and Steve Ballmer

Summary: Backlash against Novell; Ubuntu is rumoured to be considering abolishment of Mono

THE man behind the Open Source Definition never liked the Novell-Microsoft deal. After expressions of great concern about Microsoft's involvement inside OSI/"open source" and in direct response to Microsoft's lawsuit against TomTom he wrote:

“They have not turned over a new leaf, and still remain insincere about their involvement in open source,” Perens said.

Making it plain, Perens said:

“I don’t believe Microsoft was ever attempting to be sincere. A perceived involvement in open source by Microsoft, along with highly paid mouthpieces like Novell to chime in for them, is giving Microsoft the ability to speak for open source in government circles, short-circuiting the legislation we need to defend ourselves from software patents or to establish a level playing field on which open source and proprietary software can compete fairly. That’s their true interest.”

The answer is legislation, he said. Perens said legislation is needed to “clean out the software patent system. Developers need to be able to make and sell software without the threat of patent-related extortion. We must unite both proprietary and open-source developers – who are equally at risk – to work for this cause, if we’re to have a hope of being heard by legislators.”

This is similar to what the SFLC had to say, namely that “It’s a good moment for people to take a step back and re-think how friendly Microsoft is to open source.”

Here comes Novell again, characteristically appearing as Microsoft’s beloved role model. Ronald Zink from Microsoft had some interesting words to share, as noted in this article about TomTom. (emphasis is ours)

“We will talk about patents and how they relate to our technologies, but it’s on the basis of private conversations rather than openly broad negotiation,” said [Microsoft's] Zink. “We are willing to license on reasonable terms, and we have covenants not to sue open source developers or for research and development.”

[Microsoft's] Zink added that the covenants, which also extend to those companies such as Novell which agree to cross-license, “give understanding and certainty to people”.

[...]

Allison also spoke out about the TomTom case in February, saying Microsoft’s move would alienate the open source community.

We wrote about Jeremy Allison’s take in [1, 2, 3]. Two years ago he told Boycott Novell why he disliked the deal between Microsoft and Novell (his employer at the time) before he even left the company.

Other groups like the FFII and maybe the FSF have already taken it to the streets in order to protest against Microsoft (post-TomTom lawsuit). The dangers of Mono and Moonlight become ever more clear as well. Microsoft wants to fight GNU/Linux using patents and it’s looking to subvert the GPL along with European law in order to achieve this [1, 2, 3].

Sam Varghese wrote this good new article which reinforces the belief that Microsoft has officially taken a SCO-like route to fighting its #1 competitor.

But if any Microsoft employee went to a free software or open source conference today, I doubt he or she would attract anything other than hostile glares. By suing GPS device maker TomTom over alleged violation of patents connected with an implementation of the Linux kernel any goodwill that Microsoft has built up has gone down the drain.

[...]

Why did Microsoft decide to sue TomTom at this time? Is it the old arrogance asserting itself again as it has many times in the past? Is it a sense that suing at this time gives it more leeway than at others?

[...]

But there is one thing which a corporate entity like Microsoft can never comprehend. And that is the energy of the free software community, the anger and hatred that the lawsuit has generated.

When SCO started its campaign against Linux by suing IBM, it was quite confident that things would go its way. Six years later, the company is just a shell and few people would even bother pissing on it.

Somehow I have the feeling that this time Microsoft may have bitten off more than even it can chew.

It’s probably too late for Microsoft, but it’s not too late for Free software. It is a good time to wake up and realise the dangers of Novell/Microsoft technologies like Moonlight. One must realise that Mono and Moonlight act as legal obstacles which reside at the bottom of many desktop and Web applications, respsectively (thus they create an irreversible, irrevocable dependency, just like FAT).

“Novell spends a lot of time lauding and promoting its work on Mono, MonoDevelop, and Moonlight.”A reader and informant of ours has already embarked on the task involving lots of historical excavation, only to find out that popular distributions accepted Mono because everyone else had (i.e. cattle effect). This means that Mono had become contagious and dangerous at the same time. It’s a lot like FAT because it relies on the ‘network effect’ to spread itself and at the same time it comes with a loose promise not to sue which is not even being honoured (in no case, neither FAT nor Mono). The recent decision regarding Rambus teaches us that this is seen as legitimate in the US.

Novell spends a lot of time lauding and promoting its work on Mono, MonoDevelop, and Moonlight. Novell also praises Microsoft on various occasions and helps it get a ‘free pass’ — usually resulting in entry into Free software/Linux conferences [1, 2, 3]. Microsoft understands that this is a convenient way of 'crashing' competitors' events. This is all happening while Novell sacks 20% of SUSE's staff without a reasonable explanation (SUSE was one of the only growth products). Whose team is Novell playing ball for and is it being pressured to step away from the Free desktop, as some rumours suggest?

“I think the Mac has a part to play here. Mono for OS X *sucks*… no one uses it. Therefore, if programmers want to target Mac as well, they can’t really use Mono,” wrote Balrog a couple of hours ago. Another person, David Gerard, points out that “There was a rumour that, in the wake of the TomTom case, Canonical was seriously considering removing Mono from main and leaving it to multiverse as too dangerous to support (like mp3). I haven’t been able to find any more info either way, asking around.”

That would be quite a change at Ubuntu after overly-prolonged sleeping time at the wheel.

Novell newspaper

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

13 Comments

  1. David Gerard said,

    March 11, 2009 at 1:18 pm

    Gravatar

    That’s only a rumour, not anything I know for sure! Not even slightly! I asked again on Sounder just now if Canonical considered Mono dangerous like MP3.

    BTW, it looks like it’d go in Universe (community-supported packages, not endorsed by Canonical) along with Moonlight. It’s not hard to get a package into Universe.

  2. Roy Schestowitz said,

    March 11, 2009 at 1:21 pm

    Gravatar

    Thanks, we’re still watching that.

    Novell employees are involved in this too.

  3. aeshna23 said,

    March 11, 2009 at 2:09 pm

    Gravatar

    “One must realise that Mono and Moonlight act as legal obstacles which reside at the bottom of many desktop and Web applications, respsectively (thus they create an irreversible, irrevocable dependency, just like FAT).”

    I disagree with you here. Mono and Moonlight aren’t “just like FAT”. Microsoft’s legal case against Mono and Moonlight will be a far stronger case than what Microsoft can argue about FAT. I would like to suggest a reason why Microsoft is pursuing the Tom Tom case. Microsoft, of course, would like to win the TomTom case, but Microsoft figures it might as well start out with the weaker cases. Microsoft figures it can turn defeats on the weaker cases into a long run victory, by lulling the Linux community into complacency and then attack Mono in a couple of years.

  4. Darren said,

    March 11, 2009 at 3:19 pm

    Gravatar

    Well, if Novell has signed a Patent agreement, we need to somehow find out what it was for. This may mean that they are going against the GPL.

    One can only hope.

  5. Jose_X said,

    March 11, 2009 at 4:40 pm

    Gravatar

    Darren, Novell’s initial deal with Microsoft got a free pass.

    Microsoft and Novell did not violate the GPLv2 by agreeing to a “covenant not to sue customers” rather than a direct patent license as literally forbidden by the GPLv2. The GPLv3 blocks against this new agreement type but isn’t an obstacle either to this initial deal because the GPLv3 set an effective cut-off date that was after the Novell-MS deal (that deal purposely got grandfathered in — in particular, Novell let the FSF gain extra access to details of the deal, perhaps in exchange for an exception for that deal).

    >> [Microsoft’s] Zink added that the covenants, which also extend to those companies such as Novell which agree to cross-license, “give understanding and certainty to people”.

    Ah, but we know Microsoft is not a trustworthy business partner. What protection are they offering against others that might have patents on that technology, patents possibly sold by Microsoft or allowed by Microsoft to be developed by the proxies?

    Microsoft has close relationship with various patent troll companies.

  6. Roy Schestowitz said,

    March 11, 2009 at 4:46 pm

    Gravatar

    Don’t forget that — as both Novell and Microsoft have openly stressed — the deal does not prevent lawsuits. In other words, it establishes almost nothing, but for a payment it turns Novell into a marketing dunce (of Microsoft patents, of OOXML, .NET and you know the rest).

  7. Dan O'Brian said,

    March 11, 2009 at 5:52 pm

    Gravatar

    I disagree with you here. Mono and Moonlight aren’t “just like FAT”. Microsoft’s legal case against Mono and Moonlight will be a far stronger case than what Microsoft can argue about FAT.

    I think you mean far weaker, since Microsoft is helping Novell develop them. It’ll be kinda hard for Microsoft to claim damages (which they have to do) if they were involved in producing it.

    They’ll get laughed out of court.

  8. Jose_X said,

    March 11, 2009 at 8:05 pm

    Gravatar

    Dan, if those two have a patent understanding, then you might expect that those two won’t end up in court.

    Was that your point? That if you deal with Microsoft, they won’t sue you? Is that the message you wanted to bring?

  9. Roy Schestowitz said,

    March 11, 2009 at 8:15 pm

    Gravatar

    The Munchkins used to say (for years) that Microsoft only uses patents defensively.

  10. Jose_X said,

    March 11, 2009 at 9:21 pm

    Gravatar

    The more their business is threatened, the more likely they are to lash out. I also don’t trust Gates and Myrhvold.

  11. Roy Schestowitz said,

    March 11, 2009 at 9:25 pm

    Gravatar

    Why would you? They express love for software patents now.

    Both have private firms for harvesting patents. IV has already proceeded to “racketeering” phase.

  12. Needs Sunlight said,

    March 12, 2009 at 4:18 am

    Gravatar

    Microsoft’s legal case against Mono and its other crap is far, far stronger than against FAT. FAT appears to have a royalty-free license or at one that is vague enough to argue over for a while.

    Mono doesn’t. Mono has a solid paper trail of payments for royalties going from Novel to Microsoft for years. Any distro allowing packages with dependencies on Mono, Moonlight or any other MS technology is really going out of their way to cause trouble for the distro’s users.

    A half measure is to not have mono in the default:
    http://brainstorm.ubuntu.com/idea/110/

    However, that is only a half-measure. Removal from the repositories is necessary.

  13. David Gerard said,

    March 12, 2009 at 4:23 am

    Gravatar

    Removal is unlikely at this stage. Pretty much anything can be found in Universe (e.g. the stuff that is free software under copyright, but arguably violates MP3 and MPEG-LA patents), and probably should be.

    Removal from Main is another matter.

What Else is New


  1. Links 31/10/2014: Rubin Leaves Google, Neelie Kroes Ends EU Career

    Links for the day



  2. The EPO Is More Corrupt Under Battistelli Than Under Alison Brimelow: Part VIII

    After Brimelow, with all her flaws and her scandals, an even worse President is installed who then abolishes oversight and seemingly brings his old friends to the EPO, creating a sort of subculture that is impenetrable to outsiders



  3. Claiming That Microsoft 'Loves' Linux While Windows Update Bricks Devices With Linux

    The sheer absurdity of claims that Microsoft -- which not only attacks those who distribute Linux and GNU but also blackmails them, takes them to court, or bricks their products without any liability -- 'loves' Linux



  4. Protectionist Reign: Corporations in Complete Control of Everything With Domination Over Patent Law

    How multinational corporations, joined by the corporate press that they are funding, promote a corporations- but not people-friendly patent policy in north America



  5. Links 30/10/2014: GNOME 3.15.1, Red Hat Software Collections 1.2

    Links for the day



  6. Links 29/10/2014: Ubuntu Touch Tablet, Puppy Linux 6.0

    Links for the day



  7. Links 28/10/2014: SUSE Linux Enterprise 12, Canonical OpenStack Distro

    Links for the day



  8. Links 28/10/2014: PiFxOS, The Document Foundation in OSBA

    Links for the day



  9. Microsoft is Bricking Devices With Linux (Yet Again!), So a Microsoft Booster Spins/Paints Linux Devices as 'Fakes'

    Microsoft delivers rogue drivers through Windows Update and they brick Arduino microcontrollers



  10. How Bill Gates Continues to Pass Wealth From the Public to His Own Bank Account

    Having put a universal tax on many things (not just computers) and evaded tax using the classic 'charity' trick, Gates is now buying the media, the schools, politicians etc. and earns as much as 10 billion dollars per year while the public is taught that Gates is a giver, not a hoarder of the worst kind



  11. Links 27/10/2014: Lenovo Unbundling, Linux 3.18 RC2

    Links for the day



  12. IRC Proceedings: September 14th, 2014 – October 25th, 2014

    Many IRC logs



  13. Links 25/10/2014: KDE Mockups, Update on GNOME Outreach Program for Women

    Links for the day



  14. After Infecting Unity -- Successfully -- Microsoft's Partner Xamarin Wants to Infect Unreal Engine With .NET

    Xamarin continues to spread dependence on Microsoft to more gaming frameworks, not just platforms such as GNU/Linux, Android, and even permanent-state devices



  15. Taking Microsoft Windows Off the Grid for Damage to Businesses, the Internet, and Banking Systems

    Microsoft's insecure-by-design software is causing massive damages ([cref 27802 possibly trillions] of [cref 13992 dollars in damages to date]) and yet the corporate press does not ask the right questions, let alone suggest a ban on Microsoft software



  16. City of Berlin Does Not Abandon Free Software, It's Only Tax Authorities

    A Softpedia report that says the City of Berlin is moving to Microsoft Office is flawed and may be based on a poor translation



  17. Nadella a Liar in Chief at Microsoft, Pretending That His Anti-Competitive Practices Are Unfortunately Imposed on Microsoft

    The nastiness of Microsoft knows no bounds as even its assault on GNU/Linux and dirty tricks against Free software adoption are characterised as the fault of 'pirates'



  18. Reuters Writes About the Demise of Software Patents, But Focuses on 'Trolls' and Quotes Lawyers

    How the corporate media chooses to cover the invalidity of many software patents and the effect of that



  19. Links 24/10/2014: Microsoft Tax Axed in Italy, Google's Linux (ChromeOS/Android) Leader Promoted

    Links for the day



  20. Links 24/10/2014: GNU/Linux History, Fedora Delay

    Links for the day



  21. Links 23/10/2014: New *buntu, Benchmarks

    Links for the day



  22. Links 22/10/2014: Chromebooks Surge, NSA Android Endorsement

    Links for the day



  23. Links 21/10/2014: Debian Fork Debate, New GNU IceCat

    Links for the day



  24. Criminal Microsoft is Censoring the Web and Breaks Laws to Do So; the Web Should Censor (Remove) Microsoft

    Microsoft is still breaking the Internet using completely bogus takedown requests (an abuse of DMCA) and why Microsoft Windows, which contains weaponised back doors (shared with the NSA), should be banned from the Internet, not just from the Web



  25. Microsoft 'Loving' GNU/Linux and Other Corporate Media Fiction

    Microsoft has bullied or cleverly bribed enough technology-centric media sites to have them characterise Microsoft as a friend of Free/Open Source software (FOSS) that also "loves Linux"



  26. India May be Taking Bill Gates to Court for Misusing His So-called 'Charity' to Conduct Clinical Trials Without Consent on Behalf of Companies He Invests in

    Bill Gates may finally be pulled into the courtroom again, having been identified for large-scale abuses that he commits in the name of profit (not "charity")



  27. The Problems With Legal Workarounds, Patent Scope, and Expansion of Patent Trolls to the East

    Patent trolls are in the news again and it's rather important, albeit for various different reasons, more relevant than the ones covered here in the past



  28. Links 20/10/2014: Cloudera and Red Hat, Debian 7.7, and Vivid Vervet

    Links for the day



  29. Links 20/10/2014: 10 Years Since First Ubuntu Release

    Links for the day



  30. How Patent Lawyers Analyze Alice v. CLS Bank

    Breaking down a patent lawyer's analysis of a Supreme Court's decision that seemingly invalidated hundreds of thousands of software patents


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