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

03.30.09

TomTom Caves; Will Microsoft Start Charging for Mono Next?

Posted in GNU/Linux, GPL, Kernel, Microsoft, Mono, Novell, Patents, TomTom at 12:51 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Patent protection expires

Summary: Wake up call to Mono fans as TomTom pays Microsoft royalties for FAT

FOR those who have not heard yet, TomTom settled with Microsoft and agreed to pay for a Free software implementation of FAT. What about all those products out there which integrate Mono, a free implementation of Microsoft’s crown jewel and Java wannabe, .NET? Microsoft would insist that it took $3 billion in R&D.

We’ll write more about the subject later this week, but as Reuters puts it, “Under the terms of a five-year agreement, Microsoft said TomTom will pay Microsoft for use of the eight car navigation and file management system patents in the case Microsoft brought against TomTom, while Microsoft will be able to use the four patents included in the TomTom countersuit without any payment to TomTom.”

Does a “five-year agreement” sound familiar?

“Those Microsoft technologies just don’t belong in GNU/Linux; they belong in Ballnux.”According to other sources, “TomTom will remove from its products the functionality related to two file management system patents (the “FAT LFN patents”), which enables efficient naming, organizing, storing and accessing of file data, Microsoft said. TomTom will remove this functionality within two years, and the agreement provides for coverage directly to TomTom’s end customers under these patents during that time.” Groklaw says that ‘TomTom & Microsoft Settle “in a way that ensures TomTom’s full compliance with its obligations under the GPLv2″.’

Microsoft probably wins for Linux FUD in this case, so the question about who caved is irrelevant and OIN proved somewhat unhelpful.

All those Microsoft apologists who insist that the company does not use its patent offensively can hush up and Mono enthusiasts who pretend that it’s all right to just mimic Everything™ Microsoft™ can take their output and shove it in a sled (or SLED) where it belongs. Those Microsoft technologies just don’t belong in GNU/Linux; they belong in Ballnux. Speaking of which, here is a new article from Sam Varghese, who explains why SLED is a pointless product. It is — just as Novell aspired for it to be — a “cheap Windows”. Not cheap as in price; cheap as in poor.

SUSE 11 vs Windows 7: no contest

[...]

If one had to choose between an Exchange clone and Exchange itself, which one would you pick?

If there was a choice between a word processor that had Office compatibility and the real thing, why would you opt for a pretender?

If one needed to use Silverlight, then why opt for the clone that is always lagging behind in terms of full compliance?

Those who want to defeat Microsoft should stop copycatting Windows and signing patent deals. The first step may be to shun Novell projects like Mono and Moonlight and also alienate this company’s voice as far as Free software is concerned.

GNU/Linux should capitalise on its merits, not on temporary ‘protection’ from Microsoft and a permission to copy some features provided the user is paying royalties for patents that are neither legal in the large majority of the world nor even disclosed.

“If people had understood how patents would be granted when most of today’s ideas were invented, and had taken out patents, the industry would be at a complete standstill today.”

Bill Gates (when Microsoft was smaller)

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

17 Comments

  1. Eric Blair said,

    March 30, 2009 at 1:26 pm

    Gravatar

    What would happen if OIN stepped up to the bat and sued MS for falsely claiming patent rights to parts of the Linux kernel. This has set a most dangerous president. Or at least one we know about. How many other companies are paying the Microsoft GPL tax.

    Roy Schestowitz Reply:

    From 2007:

    Microsoft currently collects royalties from some companies that use Linux in their computing environments, Gutierrez said. However, he declined to indicate the number, the dollar amount Microsoft receives from those payments, or identify any of the companies by name.

    Also see: Can Germany Fine Microsoft for Slandering GNU/Linux?

  2. Jose_X said,

    March 30, 2009 at 1:41 pm

    Gravatar

    >> and OIN proved somewhat unhelpful.

    Comment here http://www.computerworlduk.com/toolbox/open-source/blogs/index.cfm?entryid=2044&blogid=14 suggests something else:

    “Did the OIN encourage this settlement? The OIN is backed by many supporters of the patent system. From that perspective, a “reasonable” settlement would be a goal. Such a “reasonable” settlement might dictate that the player with more patents come out ahead. Under this view, OIN would only get involved in the suit if one side became completely unreasonable, in their view.”

  3. Jose_X said,

    March 30, 2009 at 1:55 pm

    Gravatar

    Here is a different set of possibilities (also from the Glyn article):

    *****
    Another possibility would be for OIN to recommend that TomTom cede to Microsoft as the “proper” thing to do, but then change away from FAT.

    ..or maybe there is a larger push going on here to show FAT is an unwise format. OIN could be helping Linux build industry goodwill: Linux patents protect you when you use it, rather than penalize you when you use it.

    ..maybe it’s intended that this result will help push the kernel into a GPLv3. Linus and many others mostly accept the GPLv3, but a change would require a stimulant/catalyst.

    Roy Schestowitz Reply:

    Yes, exactly my thought. He was a little alarming at the start, but I can assure you that I still see as many devices as ever entering the market with Linux. Jay Lyman agreed.

    Microsoft’s actions are a sign of misery. It turns hostile, it becomes a parasite.

  4. aeshna23 said,

    March 30, 2009 at 2:20 pm

    Gravatar

    “Does a “five-year agreement” sound familiar?”

    Couldn’t the five-years simply reflect that the FAT patents are about 15 years old and will expire in about five years?

  5. Victor Soliz said,

    March 31, 2009 at 9:46 am

    Gravatar

    Really, lest forget mono for a second. EVERYBODY lost with this settlement. Now freaking FAT implementations needs licensing? And what about “ensures GPLv2 compliance”? So, FAT licensees will be unable to move on to GPLv3, that’s great. It’s too bad the first FAT patents case was this, and I guess MS will avoid fighting directly with these patents and just use TomTom’s fine example to push for more deals, yes, that’s right more damn deals. I can imagine it will derive in devices having to license FAT and wmv playback will come as a “bonus” license, this is so damn lame.

    To think we’ve been focusing on Mono all this time. MS has just shown they can use anything to screw us all. All they need is the broken software patents system and a lazy company to target with suits. Fighting against software patents should become a priority.

  6. Dave said,

    March 31, 2009 at 10:28 am

    Gravatar

    “What would happen if OIN stepped up to the bat and sued MS for falsely claiming patent rights to parts of the Linux kernel”

    I would like to see that, but what would happen would probably be the end of FOSS and Linux as we know it, but it would be fun to watch.

    You would want to be really really sure FOSS/OIN/Linux did not contain **AND** MS patents and be willing to pay the costs involved in losing that case.

    What would happen if Linux and FOSS lost in just one part of that, say FAT, and it was retroactive, meaning that FOSS would have to pay damages MS has suffered from the time FOSS started using MS patents in the kernel.

    Or companies like TomTom turn around and sue Linux/FOSS for providing code that is encumbered by MS patents.

    How would the SAMBA people go if they could not communicate with MS OS”s using FAT or NTFS or whatever that belongs to MS. They would be sunk.

    FOSS use FAT to enable Linux to interoperate with Windows, they do it to “ride the coat tails” of a successful company with disregard to the law.

    When the excriment hits the rotating air moving device, and it gets down to business FOSS/OIN/Linux folds.

    We were all bussily “Thinking Bilski” and “prior art” but when it comes down to it, TomTom (and by proxy LINUX) was caught out stealing patents and trying to ride the success of MS for their own purposes. WHY ELSE

    pcolon Reply:

    Samba does not use FAT or NTFS. It does not contain MS patents, it was not reverse-enginnered. It was done through network analysis. It was produced to communicate (be interoperable) with windows devices (SMB), else it’s not needed.

    Roy Schestowitz Reply:

    It seems like “Dave” is our familiar troll “darryl”, who nymshifted to “Dave” some time ago after LinuxToday had banned him for trolling.

    Jose_X Reply:

    >> [Samba] does not contain MS patents

    Well, any part of any protocol that is captured in a patent would be violated by anyone using that protocol.

    http://boycottnovell.com/2009/03/31/monodevelop-poison-factory/comment-page-1/#comment-61315

    I looked at a network Microsoft patent (late 80s or early 90s), on an efficiency implementation related to cifs(?) products, that someone posted on BN a while ago. I doubt that particular patent was over any part of the protocol. It seemed like it was about a way to implement the protocol; hence, it could be bypassed.

    You can’t, however, both (a) implement a protocol and (b) bypass a patent where the patent’s claim properties are incorporated into the protocol because implementing the protocol would imply you have an implementation/product with the properties that were patented.

    There are so many patents to check.

    [Except possibly in hypothetical or very rare cases,] I don’t believe software patents “promote the progress of the sciences and useful arts” as the US Constitution mandates must be true for any such government monopoly grant.

    Roy Schestowitz Reply:

    We should lobby IBM to do to software patents what it did to Bernard Bilski’s BM patent.

    Jose_X Reply:

    Dave, Microsoft would violate enough patents and the damage they have caused is much greater because they have a lot more of the market for a lot more years.

  7. saulgoode said,

    March 31, 2009 at 1:55 pm

    Gravatar

    You would want to be really really sure FOSS/OIN/Linux did not contain **AND** MS patents and be willing to pay the costs involved in losing that case.

    Actually, now that Microsoft is on record as litigating their FAT patent, any person, company, or organization using Linux in the United States would be justified in seeking a declaratory judgment on the validity of the patent. Doing this in and of itself risks little as there is no monetary awards in a declaratory judgment hearing. The “cost” of losing a declaratory judgment would be the same as if the patent claim were otherwise assumed valid and the technology avoided.

    Roy Schestowitz Reply:

    @saulgoode,

    Correct. It’s far from over and I’m accumulating references to show this. In the mean time, have a look at the SFLC Web site. :-)

  8. Victor Soliz said,

    April 1, 2009 at 7:26 pm

    Gravatar

    Bruce Perens on all of this IMO “Microsoft and TomTom settle, everybody loses” would be a good headline for this:

    http://itmanagement.earthweb.com/osrc/article.php/12068_3812891_1/Bruce-Perens-Microsoft-and-TomTom-Settle-Justice-and-Linux-Lose.htm

    You read it and wish it was an April Fools joke.

    IMHO all US companies depending on Linux should join and challenge the patents’ validity, it is certainly true there’s nothing innovative in FAT unlike what “Dave” would like to think. It is also all necessary. Requiring MS licensing for this will screw everyone, picture users ranting about how their USB drives won’t work in ubuntu. Migrating to another FS is a great idea, however it is freaking hard, I can already see MS not supporting the new FS by default, making users hate the new devices and stick to their patent-encumbered FAT-formatted drives. An ipod would for sure not even work anymore if you formatted it with a FOSS filesystem.

    Roy Schestowitz Reply:

    There is no “Dave”. It’s a Microsoft AstroTurfer called “darryl”. LinuxToday banned him.

What Else is New


  1. Video: LinuxWorld 1999, Torvalds and Stallman

    LinuxWorld 1999, Torvalds and Stallman



  2. GNU World Order is a Personal Sacrifice, LinuxWorld Just Business

    As the Linux Foundation shows, Linux is just business (and proprietary software) as usual, software patents included, whereas it’s GNU that continues the Free Software Movement’s battles



  3. Links 20/2/2020: Oracle Solaris 11.4 SRU18, Mesa 20, VirtualBox 6.1.4

    Links for the day



  4. Open Source Did Not Win, It Was Assimilated to and by Proprietary Software

    Don’t fall for the whole “Open Source has won!” spiel; You know we’ve lost the battle (and were in effect gradually conquered) at OSI and elsewhere when those who speak for the OSI are Michael Cheng (Facebook), Max Sills (Google), and Chris Aniszczyk (Linux Foundation); they say “Open Source Under Attack” (FOSDEM talk) but their employers are the ones attacking and they downplay openwashing



  5. Former Microsoft Employees Don't Like Talking About Past and Present Microsoft Back Doors (Designed for Spy Agencies)

    In a typical Microsoftian fashion, once they cannot defend the illusion/delusion that Microsoft values security the 'Softers' run away and block any further debate



  6. Techrights Warns Against Impending Extradition Efforts (Passage of Julian Assange to His Death in the United States)

    Imprisonment of journalists who are effective at exposing crimes (of the powerful, not petty crimes) must never be condoned



  7. Team UPC: Many Mouths and No Ears

    The mental condition of Team UPC gets more worrisome by the week



  8. Team UPC Insults Judges Because the UPC is Dead and UPC Lobbyists Have Nothing Left to Lose

    More judge-shaming tactics are in the mix; Team UPC seems to feel like there's nothing left to lose as the UPC is already dead (hope itself is next to die)



  9. IRC Proceedings: Wednesday, February 19, 2020

    IRC logs for Wednesday, February 19, 2020



  10. China Bashing is Grounded in Fear (That They Can Simply Do Better Than the West)

    The atmosphere of hate towards China — fuelled partly by a white supremacist in the White House — is unhelpful and insulting; dignity and understanding is the way to go



  11. IRC Proceedings: Tuesday, February 18, 2020

    IRC logs for Tuesday, February 18, 2020



  12. FFII Press Release: Germany Can No Longer Ratify the Unitary Patent Due to Brexit and the Established AETR Case-law, says FFII

    Germany cannot ratify the current Unitary Patent due to Brexit and the established AETR case-law. The ratification of the UPC (Unified Patent Court) by Germany would constitute a violation of the AETR case-law, which was used during the EPLA negotiations in 2006 to consider a deal with non-EU countries, such as Switzerland.



  13. DRM (Proprietary Software) Already Makes Mozilla Firefox Broken, Unreliable, Undependable (Dependent on Binary Blobs)

    More people are beginning to realise that Mozilla resorted to self-harming DRM and self-inflicted damage that impacts Firefox; can Mozilla (re)join the anti-DRM coalitions?



  14. EPO and Other Patent Updates Over RSS

    Site syndication (over RSS feeds or XML/Atom) is vastly better than what became popular in recent years (censored, centralised, discriminatory "Social Control Media"); here are some feeds of interest



  15. When It Comes to a Unitary Patent System, Bad (or Intentionally Dishonest) Legal Advice Has Become the Norm

    The Unified Patent Court and Unitary Patent (UPC and UP, respectively) reinforce the old saying about lawyers being liars, doing anything to attract clients (to take their money); the UPC is basically dead, but fiction, falsehoods and outrageous fantasies still find their way into Web sites of law firms



  16. Links 19/2/2020: KDE Plasma 5.18.1, GNOME 3.36 Beta 2 and WordPress 5.4 Beta 2

    Links for the day



  17. Is Linux Foundation a Microsoft Branch Now?

    The so-called ‘Linux’ Foundation (LF) nowadays helps Microsoft cement its monopoly — the very opposite of what ages ago it said the LF would do



  18. Are Songs Property? And Maths Also Property? Artificial Monopolies Are Not Property...

    Patent maximalists continue to face stronger arguments from their sceptics, who rightly allege that words are being intentionally misused and numbers fabricated so as to distort underlying facts



  19. Battistelli Blocked Techrights at EPO (Banned for More Than 5 Years), So CEIPI Won't Respect Access to Information Either

    The use of censorship to confront people who talk about (not even expose) corruption isn't novel; but the adoption of this approach in Europe (not just places like Russia and China) is definitely noteworthy



  20. IRC Proceedings: Monday, February 17, 2020

    IRC logs for Monday, February 17, 2020



  21. Links 18/2/2020: Linux 5.6 RC2, Wine 5.2, GNU Social Contract and Sparky 2020.02 Special Editions

    Links for the day



  22. IRC Proceedings: Sunday, February 16, 2020

    IRC logs for Sunday, February 16, 2020



  23. Links 16/2/2020: MX Linux 19.1 and MyPaint 2.0

    Links for the day



  24. IRC Proceedings: Saturday, February 15, 2020

    IRC logs for Saturday, February 15, 2020



  25. Guest Article: Au Revoir, GNU/Linux

    "Funny how OSI just ended up being another vehicle for their takeover of the computing world..."



  26. Former Microsoft Employee: ZDNet is Owned by Microsoft (and Others) in Some Senses

    A noteworthy message we've received from someone who knows Microsoft from the inside



  27. Links 15/2/2020: Blender 2.82, Qt 5.15 Alpha and NetBSD 9.0 Released

    Links for the day



  28. Microsoft Views 'Open Source' as a Zero-Cost Heist Opportunity (Making Proprietary Software/Spyware Using Other People's Free Labour)

    Making GPL-licensed (copyleft) software and hosting it outside Microsoft’s jaws is the best way to counter the abusive monopolist, which still says it “loves” what it is actually attacking



  29. Did Microsoft 'Buy' ZDNet?

    A look at what ZDNet tells its readers (screenshot from this morning) and a rare look at how its writers are censored/suppressed



  30. Anatomy of a Crime and Protection From Prosecution

    It’s hard to forget what António Campinos hides for his friend


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

Recent Posts