Novell News Summary – Part III: Acresso Deal, Groupwise, and BSM
IT HAS been another quiet week and the only press release of significance seems to be this Acresso-Novell deal and accompanying PR (also in MSNBC).
Acresso Software today announced a new, multi-year OEM agreement with Novell to provide a broader AdminStudio application readiness solution set to Novell ZENworks customers. Expanding on the capabilities available under a long-standing agreement with Novell, the complete AdminStudio Standard Edition will now be included in Novell ZENworks Configuration Management, addressing customers’ need to streamline customization steps during the preparation of reliable Windows application packages for enterprise deployment. Novell customers using the AdminStudio component of ZENworks have prepared applications for deployment in 85% less time.
SCO
Permalink
Comments off 
Send this to a friend
Novell News Summary – Part II: SLE 11 is Near; Xandros/Presto Boots Fast
Summary: SLES and SLED 11 are coming; more instant-on in the news
SUSE (SLERT/SLES/SLED)
SLERT engineers spoke at a New York City-based event a couple of days ago and the Microsoft-affiliated press wrote about a SLES-Cisco connection.
Novell News Summary – Part I: Problems at Planet OpenSUSE; Farewell, Beebe
Arrivals and Departures
IN THIS JOURNEY OF ups and downs we are finding one person who has decided to move from Ubuntu to OpenSUSE.
Permalink
Comments off Send this to a friend
IRC: #boycottnovell @ FreeNode: March 20th, 2009 – Part 2
Permalink
Comments off Send this to a friend
IRC: #boycottnovell @ FreeNode: March 20th, 2009 – Part 1
Permalink
Comments off Send this to a friend
Novell, Red Hat, and Software Patents: Strike II
Searching for truth regarding Red Hat and software patents
Summary: Novell’s long tradition of software patenting lives on, but what about Red Hat?
WE already know very well about Novell and its attitude towards software patents. It keeps acquiring them and according to the Salt Lake Tribune it has just gotten some more.
Method and system for dynamic assignment of entitlements, patent No. 7,505,972, invented by Jay Wootton of Lindon, Dennis Foster of Spanish Fork, Joe Skehan of Sandy, Charles Morgan of Springville, Jason Elsberry of Provo, Ryan L. Cox of Provo, William Street of Orem, Stephen R. Carter of Spanish Fork, and Nick Nikols of Draper, assigned to Novell Inc. of Provo.
System and method for filtering of web-based content stored on a proxy cache server, patent No. 7,506,055, invented by Carolyn B. McClain of Springville, and Jim E. Thatcher of Pleasant Grove, assigned to Novell Inc. of Provo.
What we are a little disappointed to see is that Red Hat is not serious about or at least not committed to fighting software patents, so the latest Red Hat kerkuffle is not quite over yet. Red Hat did participate in making the Bilski ruling happen, but the FFII is suggesting that there is conflicting evidence nonetheless (more on that soon).
Pieter Hintjens, the former head of the FFII, has pointed out that the first patent problem was not exactly an isolated incident when he pointed at Slashdot’s direction. It made the front page and Digital Majority covered this too. To summarise:
US Patent 7453593 claims command-line processing by a web server of SOAP requests, resulting in XML responses, from and to a remote client. The HTTP Common Gateway Interface (CGI) operates precisely as described in Claim 1. If you POST a SOAP document and return an XHTML response or a SOAP document, this infringes on Claim 2, since both XHTML and SOAP are XML languages. This patent thus claims to own the processing of SOAP documents by CGI programs.
Some guys from the FFII were preparing some questions for Rob Tiller. He joined Red Hat about a year ago. To quote JupiterMedia: “Red Hat today announced that it had hired Rob Tiller as vice president and assistant general counsel, and Richard Fontana, as open source licensing and patent counsel.”
Pieter attaches some questions (from the above):
I have some questions for Red Hat. Dear Red Hat,
* Why are you filing patents on obvious ideas with ample prior art?
* Will you promise not to sue my clients if they embed my AMQP/XML routing engine in their closed-source applications?
* What if IBM buys Red Hat, as they are buying Sun. Does Red Hat’s patent promise still apply?
* Can you confirm or deny suggestions that the Red Hat patent promise lets Red Hat license it patents to a third party, which can then sue FOSS implementors freely?
* Does Red Hat file patents on business methods (as well as on software algorithms)? If so, does your Promise cover the use of these patents by other FOSS distribution businesses?
Later on, Pieter asked:
Here are my questions to Red Hat’s lawyers:
1. Why are you filing patents on obvious ideas with prior art, like SOAP?
2. If my clients embed my free AMQP/XML engine in their closed apps, are they covered by your Promise?
3. If IBM buys Red Hat, does your Promise still hold?
4. If a 3rd party licenses a patent from you, and then sues my FOSS company, does your Promise still hold?
5. Does Red Hat file business method patents on their software distribution business?
6. If “Yes”, does your Promise protect my FOSS distribution business which uses these patents?
7. Would opposition to a Red Hat patent filing at the USPTO or EPO count as “litigation” under the Promise?
Until the use of Red Hat’s patents against competing FOSS firms and their clients is 100% clear and permanent, then I hold that Red Hat’s patent portfolio is first and foremost aimed at FOSS competitors, and only second at “trolls” and closed source firms.
In other patents news, the so-called 'reform' continues to show its wrinkles.
If Silicon Valley wants help in dealing with the so-called patent troll problem you do not need to limit damages, you just need to fix the problem.
Nothing there addresses the issue of self-defending monopolies which fend off competition. Moreover, this remains a system that punishes those who expose the truth and rewards/bribes those who propagate the great lies about ‘innovation’ and the “small inventor”. Another Internet giant, The Go Daddy Group, has just obtained patents on Web hosting/registration.
Go Daddy gets three new patents, bringing total to five.
The Go Daddy Group, Inc, parent company of domain registrar GoDaddy, has been awarded three new patents this month. Based on a search of “Go Daddy” with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, Go Daddy now has five patents. Its previously issued patents include one for private domain registration (whois privacy) and a server based spam filter.
Who does this system actually serve? It merely protects those who are wealthy enough to be able to afford patents. When it comes to software that respects people’s freedom, it even illegalises it. This helps not at all when O’Reilly publishes a book with the vague/broad title “Intellectual Property and Open Source”; there is now an excerpt from it online. If it’s patents, then call it “patents” and if it’s about copyrights, then be it “copyrights”. To say “intellectual property” is like calling Switzerland “Europe” and arguing that Europe is a land of mountains (never mind if Belgium and Holland hardly have any). █
Microsoft is Having an Affair with the UK and Ireland
Summary: Microsoft’s mischiefs in the UK and Ireland revisited (roles of Richard Steel and Brian Cowen)
WHEN WE last wrote about Richard Steel and his utilisation of Microsoft's Project Marshall to exclude Microsoft competitors, we stressed that the intention was to end an inherently corrupt practice. Heise has just taken stock of some of the evidence and it uses the narrative of Glyn Moody.
Recently Glyn Moody and Richard Steel, who is both the president of SocITM (the Society of local government IT Managers) and CIO of the London Borough of Newham, had a minor spat across their respective blogs at ComputerWorld, provoked by Steel’s response to to the UK government’s newly announced policy for the adoption and promotion of open source – Open Source, Open Standards and Re–Use: Government Action Plan. It was a bit like listening to Richard Stallman talking to a patent official.
[...]
His response is both a statement of defiance and an unconscious admission of the lack of adventure that characterises public sector procurement policy, and suggests that, irrespective of government policy and the stated policy of all the main political parties, open source is not an option that will receive a balanced assessment from IT managers in local government.
The persistent failure of the public sector to take advantage of open source is less the fault of the politicians and policy makers, who usually take the blame, than it is the fault of those who are paid to put the policy into practice.
A few days ago we were sent a pointer to this very recent speech (source: Government of Ireland), which serves as a reminder of the special relationship between Microsoft and Ireland.
I am delighted to join you this afternoon. I am particularly pleased to be sharing the podium with Jan Muehlfeit, Chairman of Microsoft Europe.
[...]
While I am delighted to be here with you at Microsoft today, my main purpose in Brussels is of course attending the European Council later this afternoon. I have spoken earlier of the international nature of the current crisis which confronts all Member States to one degree or another.
[...]
In conclusion, I want to acknowledge Paul Rellis, head of Microsoft Ireland, for the contribution he has made and continues to make in Ireland over and beyond his role for Microsoft, and also the excellent work put into today’s event by Terry Landers. I want to thank also Ambassadors Brian Nason and Bobby McDonagh and their respective teams in a very busy week.
[...]
Whether it be Irish and European companies exporting their goods and services across the globe, or major international companies – like Microsoft – investing in Europe and Ireland, above all it is the winds of open international trade that will breathe life back into the global economy. Ireland is determined to play its part. Ireland is, truly, open for business.
In order to understand why contracts are signed blindly with Microsoft, one must identify the source of incestuous relationships and the people who are involved. We shall continue to do so. █
“Crime is the soul of lust. What would pleasure be if it were not accompanied by crime? It is not the object of debauchery that excites us, rather the idea of evil.”
–Marquis de Sade
Permalink
Comments off Send this to a friend
« Previous Page — « Previous entries « Previous Page · Next Page » Next entries » — Next Page »
