07.27.10

Gemini version available ♊︎

Antitrust Attacks on IBM Carried Out by Microsoft and its “Satellite Proxies,” According to IBM

Posted in Antitrust, Europe, GNU/Linux, IBM, Microsoft, SCO at 3:23 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Satellite dish

Summary: IBM names Microsoft as a source of the complaints (or at least their financier) which target GNU/Linux-powered mainframes

GNU/Linux has several people who may sometimes seem like its friends when obviously they are not. For starters there’s Florian Müller and there are others like Bill Beebe, who sometimes act as apologists for SCO and even this week show some disregard for GNU/Linux (Beebe does not use GNU/Linux and neither does Müller by all indications).

As we pointed out yesterday, Müller is again taking shots at IBM (mass-mailing journalists and posting in several places). He is still doing this today, even minutes ago. He is like a true lobbyist and he helps Microsoft’s agenda, whether he acknowledges it or not. Earlier this month it was Kevin McBride who also helped Microsoft’s agenda by boosting SCO's case. SCO is like Microsoft's patent troll, but this one uses copyright allegations and sues IBM using Microsoft funds. Groklaw responds to ZDNet’s poor reporting by emphasising: “Kevin isn’t SCO now. His brother isn’t either.”

“What strikes me is that the price in June was going up until June 10, when Stewart ruled for Novell (look at the activity for *that* day), and then it dropped back to 0.04 the next day, and that was the highest until July 9, when Kevin McBride posted claims about Linux.”
      –Pamela Jones, Groklaw
Darl was of course sacked. Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols (SJVN) made a mistake similar to that of ZDNet and Groklaw corrects him by stressing that “this isn’t SCO talking, in that the brothers McBride are no longer associated with SCO, unless SCO’s current leadership wishes to take credit for this event.”

Separately, Groklaw points out that SCO’s stock rose as a result of this McBride action. “I find this mezmerizing,” says Pamela Jones, “this chart of SCO’s daily share price. What strikes me is that the price in June was going up until June 10, when Stewart ruled for Novell (look at the activity for *that* day), and then it dropped back to 0.04 the next day, and that was the highest until July 9, when Kevin McBride posted claims about Linux. Then you see the price go up to a high today of 0.10. Coincidence?”

Later on Groklaw wrote about the TurboHercules case, noting: “First SCO and now TurboHercules. See a pattern, anyone? I certainly do. Microsoft and its “satellite proxies”. Someone needs to investigate that as an antitrust violation, in my view, using litigation and regulatory process to harm a competitor.”

The term “satellite proxies” is an exact quote from IBM. Now that there is an antitrust investigation in the EU there is also a lively discussion and here is how IBM responds:

IBM said it is cooperating fully with E.U. regulators and that the allegations are being brought by competitor Microsoft and its “satellite proxies.”

More here:

IBM countered in its own statement that the EC’s accusations “are being driven by some of IBM’s largest competitors — led by Microsoft — who want to further cement the dominance of Wintel servers by attempting to mimic aspects of IBM mainframes without making the substantial investments IBM has made.”

Recall what Microsoft apparently did to IBM in order to restrain critics of OOXML. Here is another report that names Microsoft’s role:

In a statement, IBM said it “intends to cooperate fully” with the inquires. But it also asserts that the investigations were actually triggered by Microsoft (MSFT). “Let there be no confusion whatsoever: there is no merit to the claims being made by Microsoft and its satellite proxies,” IBM said. “IBM is fully entitled to enforce its intellectual property rights and protect the investments we have made in our technologies. Competition and intellectual property laws are complementary and designed to promote competition and innovation, and IBM fully supports these policies. But IBM will not allow the fruits of its innovation and investment to be pirated by its competition through baseless allegations.”

Microsoft spinners responded to this as follows.

IBM, based in Armonk, New York, said in a statement that “there is no merit to the claims being made by Microsoft and its satellite proxies.”

“Certain IBM competitors which have been unable to win in the marketplace through investments in fundamental innovations now want regulators to create for them a market position that they have not earned,” IBM said.

Frank Shaw, a spokesman for Redmond, Washington-based Microsoft, said in an e-mail that the company invests in startup companies such as T3 to give customers greater choice. The company isn’t a party to T3’s complaint against IBM, he said.

“We do share T3’s belief that there needs to be greater openness and choice for customers in the mainframe market,” Shaw said. “Customers tell us that they want greater interoperability between the mainframe and other platforms.”

Notice the wording. He does not deny Microsoft’s role. “Microsoft wasn’t a party to SCO v. IBM, either, but it gave money that made it possible for it to happen,” Jones explained. “You don’t have to be a party to be involved.”

“…Microsoft wished to promote SCO and its pending lawsuit against IBM and the Linux operating system. But Microsoft did not want to be seen as attacking IBM or Linux.”

Larry Goldfarb, BayStar, key investor in SCO approached by Microsoft

Share in other sites/networks: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • Reddit
  • email

Decor ᶃ Gemini Space

Below is a Web proxy. We recommend getting a Gemini client/browser.

Black/white/grey bullet button This post is also available in Gemini over at this address (requires a Gemini client/browser to open).

Decor ✐ Cross-references

Black/white/grey bullet button Pages that cross-reference this one, if any exist, are listed below or will be listed below over time.

Decor ▢ Respond and Discuss

Black/white/grey bullet button If you liked this post, consider subscribing to the RSS feed or join us now at the IRC channels.

13 Comments

  1. Florian Mueller said,

    July 27, 2010 at 3:41 am

    Gravatar

    Since the day when the TurboHercules folks explained to me their patent-related problems with IBM, I’ve been sympathetic to their cause.

    You say I help Microsoft’s agenda. However, my agenda is all about competition and innovation in IT, for which I consider FOSS an extremely important factor. Should there happen to be some overlaps between my pro-competitive agenda and Microsoft’s interests (although I’d like to see some better proof than PJ’s unsubstantiated claims), that’s fine and it’s statistically inevitable given that they have such a diversity of interests and aren’t automatically on the dark side. Even if they tried to always come down on the dark side, they couldn’t even get there consistently, I’m sure. I’d only be concerned if someone suspected me of supporting an agenda that is anticompetitive and harms innovation (and in that case it wouldn’t even matter whether that’s Microsoft’ or anyone else’s agenda because I simply wouldn’t want to be seen as promoting such a bad cause regardless of who’s behind it).

    Dr. Roy Schestowitz Reply:

    I never claimed that you served Microsoft, only that Microsoft’s interests are served by you.

    Florian Mueller Reply:

    Yes, I know. I was merely responding to your claim that I help Microsoft’s *interests*. I believe I made that reference very clearly. I explained that if a cause is a good cause, it doesn’t become a bad one just because of whatever reasons they may have to strive for the same objective in a particular case. In a statement on yesterday’s announcement they said they’d like to see more openness in that market. I have no problem with that.

    Dr. Roy Schestowitz Reply:

    What do you believe they mean by “openness”?

    Florian Mueller Reply:

    The quote about openness is short and doesn’t specify, but since the antitrust case is about tying hardware to an operating system (z/OS), I guess they mean — just like the complainants — that running z/OS in emulation should be allowed. From my point of view that’s also a matter of software freedom. Even though z/OS running on free software (Hercules on GNU/Linux for Intel) wouldn’t be a free configuration according to the Free Software Definition, emulation is a software-related freedom the way I view it.

    Dr. Roy Schestowitz Reply:

    What Microsoft means by “openness” is that it should run Windows, not GNU/Linux.

    Florian Mueller Reply:

    The Hercules project developers for GNU/Linux and Windows. The commercial offerings of the TurboHercules company relate to both operating systems as well.

    Dr. Roy Schestowitz Reply:

    Groklaw has already explained why TurboHercules would be useful to Windows. It was in one of the later posts about this case.

    Florian Mueller Reply:

    Groklaw didn’t explain why a project (and a commercial offering around it) available for both GNU/Linux and Windows would be particularly useful to Windows. Groklaw portrayed TurboHercules as a Windows-only thing.

    Dr. Roy Schestowitz Reply:

    No, as a Windows facilitator.

  2. Florian Mueller said,

    July 27, 2010 at 3:48 am

    Gravatar

    Concerning my use of GNU/Linux, my online gaming startup (which I co-founded in 1996 and we sold to Telefónica in early 2000 before the dotcom crash) was among the first wave of startups in Europe to use GNU/Linux on the server side (we used the SuSE distribution, and our database was PostgreSQL). I also used it for web server purposes thereafter, which is how I became aware of and involved with MySQL.

    On my desktop and my notebook, I use Windows 7, but there’s plenty of FOSS for Windows and I use some of it. I saw a list of the top 10 SourceForge application projects and every one of them is available for Windows in some form. I don’t believe in dichotomy concerning FOSS and proprietary software. In particular, I don’t want software patents to hurt either category. More importantly, I want FOSS to put competitive pressure on everyone because that will ensure that I also get to buy high-quality proprietary software at reasonable prices. I believe in choice.

    Dr. Roy Schestowitz Reply:

    That spin about “choice” is the same talking point Microsoft uses. Anyway, my suspicions were right.

    twitter Reply:

    Florian, I don’t think you understand software freedom or software quality. If you did, you would not sell your freedom for the restrictions and second rate performance of Windows 7/Vista. Nor would you equate free and non free software as “choices”. Free software is about rights and freedom. Non free software is about extracting revenues by various unjust restrictions. Non free software can not be verified and should not be trusted. Its owners can betray you as they please and they reserve the right to terminate use of their software at any time. Free software now offers both a better deal and better performance all around.

DecorWhat Else is New


  1. Audio: Mark Shuttleworth Targeted Young Males and With Sexy Pictures

    The Web is rotting away, old links become broken links within months or years, so I’ve decided to encode a 3-minute segment of the whole as Ogg



  2. What a Difference Half a Decade Makes (When Linux Foundation is 'Having Fun')

    Media shaming campaigns may have taken their toll on the founder of Linux, who is now bossed by someone who rejects Linux and is married to a Microsoft booster. Like Richard Stallman under FSF guidance (and conditions for return, mostly for fear of further media assaults and attack dogs), he has become a more publicity-shy and private person. The Linux Foundation has in effect reduced the founder of what it’s called after (Linux) into a weekly release manager and mascot, whose brand it is gradually diluting/cheapening.



  3. Links 15/05/2022: GNU libiconv 1.17

    Links for the day



  4. [Meme] Unitary Patent and Unified Patent Court (UPC) Cannot Be Reconciled With the Law

    Unitary Patent and Unified Patent Court (UPC)? Impossible. But Team UPC counts on an endless torrent of fake news managing to convince you (and more importantly politicians) otherwise.



  5. Even Team Battistelli is Sometimes Admitting -- Out in Public! -- That Unified Patent Court (UPC) is Neither Legal Nor Desirable

    Daniel X. Thomas and other people who are “too old to punish” (consequences to their career profoundly minimised owing to seniority) are among those who push back against the Unitary Patent or Unified Patent Court (UPC); any sane person — not a career-climbing litigation zealot — can identify the pertinent facts and realise that what’s going on here is an injustice of unprecedented proportions in the patent discipline



  6. [Meme] Common Sense at EPO

    The European examiners who deal with patents prefer a system that works for science, for Europe, not for foreign megacorporations that amass millions of low-quality patents and weaponise these to discourage competition



  7. Patent Granting at the EPO Has Collapsed by 24% Owing to Much-Needed Industrial Action

    Seeing that the EPO’s management routinely violates the law and even the very legal basis of the EPO’s existence (it is a monopoly in Europe; no body has the authority to compete against it), the EPO’s examiners have embarked on a ‘Work-to-Rule’ campaign — working in compliance with the rules as defined 49 years ago and revised over the decades — and the European Patent Convention (EPC) takes priority over unlawful demands from middle and upper management; this is proving highly effective so far and it will carry on until demands are met, i.e. until the law is obeyed and staff is treated with respect/dignity



  8. [Meme] Milan is a Suburb in London

    As long as Italy is not the UK and London means London “proper” (not the French town called London) the UPCA is invalid and no matter how much Team UPC (and its puppets in EPO management) may plead, this whole system is bound to implode



  9. The Latest Propaganda Tactics of Team UPC: Pretending Unified Patent Court Already Exists and Unitary Patents Are Default When If Fact None Even Exists

    8 years ago Benoît Battistelli said that the UPC was imminent; now, after 4 years of António Campinos, it’s still not here and Team UPC speculators say it won’t happen this year, either; just like the EPO constantly lies (both to the public and to its very own staff) Team UPC continues to lie to itself (self-delusion) and to us; both also routinely break the law, engage in deliberate violations of longstanding conventions, and scrap constitutions, which in turn becomes a breaking point for the EU’s credibility and the legal profession



  10. Links 15/05/2022: More Azure Shutdowns and Windows Security Blunders Aplenty

    Links for the day



  11. IRC Proceedings: Saturday, May 14, 2022

    IRC logs for Saturday, May 14, 2022



  12. Links 15/05/2022: Pika Backup 0.4

    Links for the day



  13. Changes in the Site and the Capsule

    A 10-minute explanation of what we've been up to lately and what's changing; hopefully I'll have a lot more free time in months to come and we'll be able to produce about a dozen posts per day



  14. Links 14/05/2022: Alt Linux 10.0 Released

    Links for the day



  15. Links 14/05/2022: Builder GTK 4 Porting and Raspberry Pi Matrix Dashboard

    Links for the day



  16. Elon Musk is Right About Twitter Faking Its Importance and Using Doctored, Manipulated 'Stats' (or Bots) to Boost Valuation Based on Lies

    Today’s empirical proof that Twitter is totally faking its relevance and reach/influence, based on “Analytics” of my long-inactive account; the SEC will once again — quite likely as usual — let Musk get away with it, killing a company for personal gain as a temporary shareholder who amassed a ton of free publicity (he paid nothing at all and sent the company into a death spiral, pretty much in the same way Microsoft and Icahn did Yahoo! or Microsoft and Elop did Nokia)



  17. Who Brings Home the Bacon (Revenue), Sheela or James (Jim)?

    Sheela (yes, wife of the nontechnical Linux Foundation chief, who equates Microsoft critics with people who kick puppies) has a history working with several companies that are closely connected to Microsoft (not just Bakkt); can that be reconciled as not a conflict of interest?



  18. The 'Original' Linus Torvalds on Self-Hosting

    The fast-aging founder of Linux spoke as shown above (2005); so much has changed since then…



  19. IRC Proceedings: Friday, May 13, 2022

    IRC logs for Friday, May 13, 2022



  20. Links 13/05/2022: NetworkManager 1.38 and Pseudo-Security

    Links for the day



  21. Links 13/05/2022: GCC 12 Becoming Default Compiler in Tumbleweed

    Links for the day



  22. Links 13/05/2022: End of 'About BSD'

    Links for the day



  23. IRC Proceedings: Thursday, May 12, 2022

    IRC logs for Thursday, May 12, 2022



  24. Links 12/05/2022: AlmaLinux OS 8.6 and LibreOffice 7.2.7

    Links for the day



  25. [Meme] Yes, Minister, Yes!

    We’re meant to think that patents — not sharing — are going to save the world



  26. Central Staff Committee of the EPO Reminds the EPO's Management, Yet Again, That It is Breaking Laws

    Sinking quality of European Patents, plus a Patent Granting Process that is not compliant with the law, quite likely mean the EPO drives straight into a wall; the Central Staff Committee is still trying to save the institution, but management is uncaring and unresponsive (these people typically serve a term and leave, so they couldn’t care less about the long-term viability of their employer)



  27. Formalities Officers Team Managers at the European Patent Office Consider Stepping Down

    Formalities Officers Team Managers at Europe's second-largest institution face a growing list of issues; some are even "considering stepping down," according to internal documents



  28. Links 11/05/2022: KDE Gear 22.04.1 and EuroLinux 8.6

    Links for the day



  29. IRC Proceedings: Wednesday, May 11, 2022

    IRC logs for Wednesday, May 11, 2022



  30. SPAMnil Appears to be Buying Fake Views in YouTube (to Embellish a Failing Channel)

    It seems like SPAMnil is ordering clickbots or similar to boost the “views” of his videos (by a factor of 10 or more, as before); I’ve gathered what I believe to be more than sufficient evidence of that (the above uses the Wayback Machine to make a point) and this is not about a channel's failure but an ethical breach, a liability for the Linux Foundation that likes to brag with false numbers in order to sell PR services


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