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

11.09.09

Some New Examples of FUD Against Linux, GNU, and the GPL

Posted in Free/Libre Software, FSF, FUD, GNU/Linux, GPL, Microsoft at 5:11 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

News truck

Summary: Microsoft tries to abolish the GPL and the Free desktop; FUD against Stallman and distortions about Linux development are combated by Groklaw

DANA Blankenhorn has asked what it would take for people to trust Microsoft. His post is very theoretical and conveniently it seems to be ignoring Microsoft’s constant attacks on GNU/Linux [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6].

Microsoft has entire teams dedicated to fighting against GNU/Linux (and the GPL). Some years ago it brought someone called Sam Ramji [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12] from SaaS in order to justify the whole practice of giving free code to proprietary vendors and Microsoft products that render it non-free, just like so-called “clouds”. It is worth remembering that Sam Ramji does not come from an area that he pretends to understand (he actually was caught spreading disinformation about the GPL, maybe not deliberately) and having just quit he goes back to the same area he came from and it’s not “open source”. This latest post from him — “Does open source still matter in cloud computing?” — is yet more indication that Microsoft never cared about Freedom, and hardly even openness. The same goes for its buddy the Gartner Group, whose discrimination against Free software is being noticed by more people, some of whom sue the firm [1, 2]. Here is a new Twitter item: ‘A jewel from Gartner: “Definition: open source for IP telephony is the use of public-domain programs to create IP PBX..”. Public domain ????

They cannot tell Free/open source software, even if it hit them in the face. Regarding CodePlex, Groklaw links to an analysis from Andy Updegrove and states:

Andy gushes on, but I note that this is a foundation that intends to outnumber the GPL. I don’t know if it means their only weapon left to kill the GPL is money, or if this is just adding another quiver to their bow. But it’s obvious they don’t mean to include the GPLv2, from this paragraph:

Open Source Licenses. The Foundation will maintain a list of recommended Open Source licenses for projects and maintain information necessary to understand how code can be shared between projects with the purpose of avoiding unexpected restrictions in how the final code can be used or redistributed. This includes maintaining information that makes clear how projects can incorporate external code. It should be possible, for example, for a project to incorporate appropriately licensed code without requiring a formal contribution of that code.

So, the development model that has served the community so well will be avoided by Codeplex in large part, and it looks like a way for corporate sponsors to buy programmers’ time so they can get them to write code that the sponsors would find useful. So you can write for Microsoft and its fellow Corporate Cougars, and in return for their largesse, what do you get in the end? I suspect what Steve Ballmer said was Microsoft’s goal, that all the open source applications you want run on Microsoft’s operating system, not the Linux kernel, which is GPLv2, not v3, and then who needs Linux? They’ve paid you to get out of the bazaar and back into the cathedral, just with a bigger, professionally maintained yard.

Consider the fact that Microsoft apparently violates the GPL and grabs code from CodePlex — code which it then proprietarises.

“…Microsoft apparently violates the GPL and grabs code from CodePlex — code which it then proprietarises.”Some days ago we wrote about Microsoft paying $100,000 to Apache [1, 2], Groklaw’s response to which is: “As long as it gets its money’s worth, I suppose?” To Microsoft, this is a simple case of buying influence [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17].

To say more on the GPL, Groklaw complains about this post from Jack Wallen, who Pamela Jones claims to “ha[ve] written a list of the 10 biggest failures in IT history, including two, BeOS and WordPerfect who many of us would say were killed off by Microsoft, and he includes as Number 7 Richard Stallman.”

Jack Wallen is truly an advocate of GNU/Linux, but he does not agree with the FSF. That’s okay, but he has just insulted Richard Stallman and Groklaw replied as follows (in News Picks, to which there is no fixed URL):

Jack, if you are going to write about history, you should read some first. Stallman is associated with Free Software, not Open Source. He has never been a “champion of open source” so you have made a very deep and frankly humorous error. Free Software is also Open Source, but Stallman distinguishes his and the FOSS community’s work from the breakaway group that decided business would never accept the GPL or Stallman, and so they decided to hide those bits, because to them acceptance by business was more important.

Look at the results. Would you say it has been beneficial that corporations discovered Linux? Post-SCO and the Novell-Microsoft peace pact, what arguments would you offer that it has been a good thing? And now Microsoft would like to kill off The Real Thing and substitute its own Brand X “Open Source”, as per the Codeplex Foundation, and smearing Richard Stallman is the latest coin of its realm.

I note that Jeff Gerhardt, presumably the Jeff Gerhardt of the Linux Show, sounds off as well, not to correct the mistake, but to pile on, including the following: “But the problem with Richard and many in the die-hard FOSS community (many who are close friends of mine), is they in their desire to spread the good of FOSS (and there is indeed good) they also close the door on ANY other option.

That is often the problem with radicals. The first thing that happens in a socialist state as an example, is a change in the ability of the media to be critical of government.”

Nice FUD, bringing in “radicals” and “socialist state” words. Vicious FUD, actually. Without Richard Stallman, there’d never have been a Linux Show. Or Red Hat. Or Linux. Or any of this.

Richard Stallman will go down in history for changing the world, because it was all his idea. And when either Jack Wallen or Jeff Gerhardt wins a MacArthur Genius Award, as Richard Stallman did, send me the memo. Before you criticize someone who won an award for being a genius in his field, you might ask if you have the chops to even understand what he is doing. Meanwhile, note carefully who really understands FOSS and who doesn’t grasp even the foundational concepts. It’s important to know who your real friends are and who is just making a living.

In News Picks, Groklaw also claims to be “Answering some OSNews FUD”. Jones says:

The link takes you to the beginning of the thread, where Gordon posts his desire to submit his FatELF code to the Linux kernel guys, who quite correctly point out some important reasons not to do that. Gordon then posts that he ran into a “buzzsaw”, which I consider inaccurate, but you can read it for yourself. And the OSNews publishes it all as if it were a crying shame the Linux kernel meanies didn’t accept the code, without even mentioning the patent issue. What’s with OSNews, anyway?

It’s not OSNews in general, it’s Thom Holwerda.

Holwerda is the reason I chucked out OS News from my reading list, being a semi-official FOSS basher and Windows booster. It is sad to see such a distortion being used to make Linux look bad.

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

What Else is New


  1. Team UPC Calls Critics of the UPC Idiots, Deletes Their Comments, and Blocks Them

    A new low for Team UPC, which is unable to cope with reality and has begun literally mocking and deleting comments of people who speak out truths



  2. How the Opposition to CRISPR Patents at the EPO Sent Shockwaves Through the Industry

    Additional reports/coverage on the EPO (European Patent Office) revoking Broad Institute's CRISPR patent show that the issue at hand isn't just one sole patent but the whole class/family of patents



  3. Unified Patents Says That RPX, Which Might Soon be Owned by Patent Trolls, Paid Patent Trolls Hundreds of Millions of Dollars

    Unified Patents, which helps crush software patents, takes note of RPX’s financial statements, which reveal the great extent to which RPX actually helped trolls rather than stop them



  4. IAM Together With Its Partner, IIPCC, is Lobbying the USPTO to Crush PTAB and Restore Patent Chaos

    Having handled over 8,000 petitions (according to Professor Lemley's Lex Machina), PTAB champions patent quality at the USPTO, so front groups of the litigation 'industry' creep in and attempt to lobby the likely next Director of the USPTO (inciting him against PTAB, as usual)



  5. Software Patents Are Still Dropping Like Flies in 2018, Thanks to Alice v CLS Bank (SCOTUS, 2014) and Section 101 (USPTO)

    Section 101 (§ 101) is thriving in the sense that it belatedly throws thousands of patents -- and frivolous lawsuits that depend on them -- down the chute; the patent trolls and their allies in the patent microcosm are very furious and they blame PTAB for actually doing its job (enforcing Section 101 when petitioned to do so)



  6. Patent Troll Finjan Looks Like It's About to Collapse, But Patent Maximalists Exploit It for Software Patents Promotion

    Patent trolls are struggling in their use of software patents; few (if any) of their patents are upheld as valid and those that miraculously remain in tact become the subject of fascination if not obsession among trolls' advocates



  7. The Attacks on PTAB Are Slowing Down and Attempts to Shield Oneself From Inter Partes Reviews (IPRs) Are Failing

    The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) reapplies patent eligibility tests/guidelines in order to squash likely invalid patents; The litigation 'industry' is not happy about it, but its opposition to PTAB is also losing steam



  8. Links 21/1/2018: Wine 3.0 Coverage, KaOS 2018.01, Red Hat Among 'Admired Companies'

    Links for the day



  9. Blockchain Patents Are a Catastrophe in the Making as Trolls and Aggressors Accumulate Them

    As patents pertaining to blockchains continue to be granted -- even in defiance of Alice/Section 101 -- it seems likely that patent wars will sooner or later erupt, involving some large banks, IBM, and patent trolls associated with the notorious Erich Spangenberg



  10. Qualcomm/Broadcom/NXP Combination Would Become a Disastrous Patent Thicket Which Benefits Nobody

    Worried by the prospect of mega-mergers and takeovers which would put far too much market power (and monopoly through patents) in one place, governments and corporations speak out



  11. Patent Litigation in East Asia: Huawei, Samsung, HTC, Nintendo and COLOPL

    A quick look at some high-profile cases in which large Asian firms are embroiled; it seems clear that litigation activities have shifted eastwards (where actual production is done)



  12. Patent Litigation in the US is Down Sharply and Patent Trolls' Demise Has Much to Do With It

    Docket Navigator and Lex Machina both show a significant decline in litigation -- a trend which is likely to carry on now that TC Heartland is in tact (not for just half a year but a whole year) and PTAB completes another record year



  13. Cheating the US Patent System is a Lot Harder After TC Heartland

    Some new examples of tricks (and sometimes cheats) attempted by patent claimants and their representatives; it does not go as well as they hoped



  14. RPX Might Soon be Owned by Patent Troll Erich Spangenberg

    RPX, whose top executives are leaving and business is gradually dying, might end up as another 'asset' of patent trolls



  15. Patent Quality (Not Numbers) as an Asset: Oppositions, Appeals and Rejections at the EPO

    Benoît Battistelli wants a rubber-stamping operation (like INPI) rather than a functional patent office, but oppositions at the Office prove to be fruitful and many erroneously-granted patents are -- by extrapolation -- already being revoked (affecting, in retrospect, Battistelli's so-called 'results')



  16. Links 19/1/2018: Linux Journalism Fund, Grsecurity is SLAPPing Again

    Links for the day



  17. The EPO Ignores This Week's Decision Which Demonstrates Patent Scope Gone Awry; Software Patents Brought Up Again

    The worrisome growth of European Patents (EPs) — a 40% jump in one year in spite of decline in the number of patent applications — is a symptom of the poor judgment, induced largely by bad policies that impede examiners’ activities for the sake of so-called ‘production’; this week's decision regarding CRISPR is another wake-up call and software patents too need to be abolished (as a whole), in lieu with the European Patent Convention (EPC)



  18. WesternGeco v ION Geophysical (at the US Supreme Court) Won't Affect Patent Scope

    As WesternGeco v ION Geophysical is the main if not sole ‘major’ patent case that the US Supreme Court will deal with, it seems safe to say that nothing substantial will change for patent scope in the United States this year



  19. Links 18/1/2018: MenuLibre 2.1.4, Git 2.16 Released

    Links for the day



  20. Microsoft, Masking/Hiding Itself Behind Patent Trolls, is Still Engaging in Patent Extortion

    A review of Microsoft's ugly tactics, which involve coercion and extortion (for businesses to move to Azure and/or for OEMs to preload Microsoft software) while Microsoft-connected patent trolls help hide the "enforcement" element in this whole racket



  21. Patent Prosecution Highway: Low-Quality Patents for High-Frequency Patent Aggressors

    The EPO's race to the bottom of patent quality, combined with a "need for speed", is a recipe for disaster (except for litigation firms, patent bullies, and patent trolls)



  22. Press Coverage About the EPO Board Revoking Broad's CRISPR Patent

    Even though there's some decent coverage about yesterday's decision (e.g. from The Scientist), the patent microcosm googlebombs the news with stuff that serves to distract from or distort the outcome



  23. Links 17/1/2018: HHVM 3.24, WordPress 4.9.2

    Links for the day



  24. No Patents on Life (CRISPR), Said EPO Boards of Appeal Just a Few Hours Ago

    Broad spectacularly loses its key case, which may soon mean that any other patents on CRISPR too will be considered invalid



  25. Only Two Weeks on the Job, Judge Patrick Corcoran is Already Being Threatened by EPO Management

    The attack on a technical judge who is accused of relaying information many people had already relayed anyway (it was gossip at the whole Organisation for years) carries on as he is again being pushed around, just as many people predicted



  26. EPO Board of Appeal Has an Opportunity to Stop Controversial Patents on Life

    Patent maximalism at the EPO can be pushed aback slightly if the European appeal board decides to curtail CRISPR patents in a matter of days



  27. Links 16/1/2018: More on Barcelona, OSI at 20

    Links for the day



  28. 2018 Will be an Even Worse Year for Software Patents Because the US Supreme Court Shields Alice

    The latest picks (reviewed cases) of the Supreme Court of the United States signal another year with little or no hope for the software patents lobby; PTAB too is expected to endure after a record-breaking year, in which it invalidated a lot of software patents that had been erroneously granted



  29. Patent Trolls (Euphemised as “Public IP Companies”) Are Dying in the United States, But the Trouble Isn't Over

    The demise of various types of patent trolls, including publicly-traded trolls, is good news; but we take stock of the latest developments in order to better assess the remaining threat



  30. EPO Management and Team UPC Carry on Lying About Unified Patent Court, Sinking to New Lows in the Process

    At a loss for words over the loss of the Unitary Patent, Team UPC and Team Battistelli now blatantly lie and even get together with professional liars such as Watchtroll


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