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

04.06.11

A Future for Microsoft as Lobbying Firm and Vulture Fund

Posted in GNU/Linux, Microsoft, Novell, Patents, SCO at 7:01 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Wedge-tailed eagle

Summary: As Microsoft has championed tactics for winning without really winning (but by changing the rules and distorting the game), there is this niche left for Microsoft to target when it no longer manages to sell or bundle products, let alone make money from pushy patent deals and litigation

MICROSOFT was never a technology company, unlike Google for example. Microsoft was not created by technologists, or at least did not focus on them. Microsoft knew how to leverage other people’s work, how to crush competitors, how to strike deals (nepotism helped), and how to get away from law enforcement after it had repeatedly broken the law (also thanks to nepotism).

To Microsoft, subversion of the law has been instrumental in growing the business. To this date, Microsoft relies on subverting the law, doing whatever is necessary (e.g. software patenting) to make its competition illegal [1, 2] and every buyer of a new computer obliged to pay Microsoft a tax (Microsoft tries to do the same with every phone sold).

In some of our more recent posts we alluded to Microsoft’s lobbying for laws that relate to counterfeiting. Microsoft wishes to devour this cake and keep it too. Or as one Microsoft-hostile reporter has just put it:

Microsoft has lobbied state legislators in the US to introduce a law which would prevent a business selling goods and services if one of its suppliers was found to be using pirated Microsoft software.

It would enable Microsoft to pursue losses resulting from piracy in foreign lands, such as China, where it may be more difficult to bring direct action against the actual user of the pirated software.

Why is Microsoft trying to change the law in the first place? And why does the government accept this corporocratism. Whose government is it? Who does it serve, the people or the rich executives who work at Microsoft? Last year Tony Whitcomb alleged that Microsoft's Jon DeVaan had engaged in political corruption/election fraud. He claimed DeVaan was his “former boss/business partner” and he has sent us dozens of E-mails since then, yesterday alleging “Obama/Microsoft Illegal Campaign Contributions 2008″. We covered this at the time because families of Microsoft executives, including the Gates family and Ballmer family, had paid Obama privately. That’s how Microsoft does “business”. Or to put it in the words of a new post:

Since providing this confidential information to the FBI, over one a year ago, I have now been completely, as well as thoroughly, retaliated against by both the Obama Administration, as well as Microsoft, so I am now sincerely hoping that the Political Fail Blog, would now be willing to provide me with any type of help and/or assistance, in getting all of this extremely important information out to the American People and to all of our fellow American Citizens, who presently maybe living and/or fighting for our Country abroad and I sincerely thank all of you in advance, for all of your time and for your immediate considerations into these extremely serious matters and I truly wish all of you nothing but continued peace, prosperity, blessings and success, in all of your current and future endeavors!

The payments made to Obama by Microsoft (with expectation of favours like this one being returned) are probably less interesting than payments made by Microsoft to other companies, with the expectation that these companies would attack Linux. Recall the situation of SCO and Norris [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9] and also recall vulture fund like Elliot and Icahn, who worked with Microsoft. What we know for a fact is that SCO received millions from Microsoft after its Linux lawsuit, then got $30 million from a Microsoft-backed proxy (Baystar), and later on Bill Gates’ father had his firm come over to SCO to deal with financial issues. This is how “business” is done at Microsoft. It’s shady, it’s secretive, it’s corrupt. And right now the Bill Gates-funded Intellectual Ventures is extorting Microsoft’s rivals.

Meanwhile, as explained by Groklaw, SCO is SCO is being morphed into UnXis:

Trading in SCO shares has been suspended. Here’s the SEC press release. It seems not filing anything for a couple of years gets the SEC’s attention eventually, even if nothing else does:

The Commission temporarily suspended trading in the securities of these fourteen issuers due to a lack of current and accurate information about the companies because they have not filed periodic reports with the Commission in over two years.

So a temporary suspension. Meanwhile, one presumes the sale of substantially all of SCO’s assets to unXis has happened. The judge on March 7 gave Novell 14 days to appeal, if they chose to, and they chose not to.

It’s interesting enough that Novell did not appeal and given that Novell is helping Microsoft these days, e.g. by giving it patents, it’s not entirely shocking (Groklaw expected Novell to appeal). Microsoft is doing “business” by picking companies like SCO and Novell for their own battles and bidding. Poor “puppy”. Maybe it should enter the vulture fund and lobbying business. That’s something Microsoft has mastered for decades.

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. The Federal Circuit Continues Squashing Software Patents

    Under the leadership of Sharon Prost the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) continues its war on software patents, making it very hard to remember the last time it tolerated any



  2. SUEPO Representatives Like Elizabeth Hardon Vindicated as Battistelli's Detrimental Effect on Patent Quality is Widely Confirmed

    Feedback regarding the awful refusal to acknowledge patent quality crisis at the EPO as well as the appointment of a President so close to Battistelli (who most likely assures continuation of his policies)



  3. Links 17/10/2017: KDE Frameworks 5.39.0, Safe Browsing in Epiphany

    Links for the day



  4. Judge Bryson Rules Against Allergan After It Used Native American Tribes to Dodge Scrutiny of Patents (IPRs); Senator Hatch Does Not Understand IPRs

    Having attempted to dodge inter partes reviews (IPRs) by latching onto sovereign immunity, Allergan loses a key case and Senator Hatch is meanwhile attempting to water down IPRs albeit at the same time bemoaning patent trolls (which IPRs help neutralise)



  5. Rumours That António Campinos Initially Had No Competition at All (for Battistelli's Succession) Are Confirmed

    Succession at the EPO (mostly French) shows that there's little room for optimism and Battistelli's people are too deeply entrenched in the upper echelons of the EPO



  6. EPO Stakeholders Complain That the New Chairman Does Not Grasp the Issues at the EPO (or Denies These)

    Some information from inside the EPO’s Administrative Council, whose Chairman is denying (at least to himself) some of the core issues that render the EPO less competitive in the international market



  7. Another Misleading Article Regarding Patents From Rana Foroohar at the Financial Times

    In an effort to promote the agenda of patent maximalists, many of whom are connected to the Financial Times, another deceiving report comes out



  8. Monika Ermert's Reports About the Crisis at the EPO and IP Kat's Uncharacteristically Shallow Coverage

    News from inside the Council shows conflict regarding the quality of European Patents (granted by the EPO under pressure from top-level management)



  9. Patent Troll VirnetX a Reminder to Apple That Software Patents Are a Threat to Apple Too

    VirnetX, a notorious patent troll, is poised to receive a huge sum of money from Apple and Qualcomm is trying to ban Apple products, serving to remind Apple of the detrimental impact of patents on Apple itself



  10. Links 16/10/2017: Linux 4.14 RC5, Debian 9.2.1, End of LibreOffice Conference 2017

    Links for the day



  11. The Systematic Erosion of Workers' Rights and Holidays at the EPO Goes Years Back

    The legitimacy of the staff's concerns at the EPO, having seen basic labour safeguards being shredded to pieces by Battistelli for a number of years (predating even the escalation of the conflict)



  12. Articles in English and German Speak About the Decline in Quality of European Patents (Granted by the EPO)

    Heise and The Register, two sites that have closely watched EPO affairs for a number of years, speak about the real problem which is declining patent quality (or rushed examination) -- a recipe for frivolous litigation in Europe



  13. Software Patents and Patent Trolls Not a Solved Issue, But the US is Getting There

    A media survey regarding software patents, which are being rejected in the US in spite of all the spin from law firms and bullies such as IBM



  14. US Patent Trolls Are Leaving and the Eastern District of Texas Sees Patent Cases Falling by More Than Half

    The decline of patent aggression in the US and the patent microcosm's response to Justices, having ruled in TC Heartland, curtailing patent trolls



  15. Qualcomm's Nightmares Are Getting Worse as Antitrust Questions Are Raised and Assessed

    Qualcomm is getting itself deeper in trouble as fines pile up and its multi-billion dollar dispute with Apple isn't getting it anywhere



  16. Forget About Apple; Two of the Leading Phone Makers (Samsung and Huawei) Are Bickering Over Patents

    Massive Android OEMs, Huawei and Samsung, are in a big patent dispute and this time, for a change, China is a legal battleground



  17. Tim Heberden From the Glasshouse Advisory is Throwing Stones in a Glasshouse to Create Patent Litigation

    IAM's latest lobbying, aided by the patent microcosm, for a climate of feuds and disputes (to line the pockets of the litigation 'industry')



  18. Access to Medicine is More Important Than Patents

    Some of the latest news about patents that impede/deny access to crucial medication; strategic litigation from the generics sector, seeking to invalidate patents and then offer low-cost alternatives



  19. Links 14/10/2017: Windows Breaks Dutch Law, Wine 2.19 Released

    Links for the day



  20. The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) Supported by Congress, a Federal Judge, Soon to be Supported by the Supreme Court Too?

    The Patent Trial and Appeal Board is still widely defended, except by the patent microcosm which likes (and profits from) patent trolls and litigation Armageddon



  21. Patents Are Turning BlackBerry and Nokia, Which Used Android, Into Anti-Android Fronts That Tax Android OEMs

    The Canadian BlackBerry has sued BLU in the US only to compel it to pay 'protection' money; Nokia's patents are being scattered to trolls, which are doing something similar (without risking litigation themselves)



  22. The Unified Patent Court (UPC) is Rotting Like the European Patent Office

    The Unitary Patent litigation pipe dreams (or prosecution/trolling fast lane), which Battistelli's EPO long relied on, turn out to be the road to nowhere



  23. Lying and Faking Now a Standard Procedure at the European Patent Office

    The European Patent Organisation (EPO) under the leadership (or chairmanship) of Christoph Ernst continues to relay lies from Battistelli's Office, SUEPO rejects these, the Office lies about SMEs, prioritises Microsoft (again), and probably buys fake Twitter "followers"



  24. Links 13/10/2017: X.Org Server 1.19.5, pfSense 2.4, Final Stages of Ubuntu 17.10

    Links for the day



  25. Truly Terrible 'Journalism' About António Campinos Boils Down to Lobbying and Agenda-Pushing

    The expectedly shallow coverage of the appointment (succession) of Battistelli's French pick, which will likely change nothing of significance at the European Patent Office (EPO)



  26. Under Christoph Ernst, the Council is Just a Megaphone of Battistelli's EPO, Including on Patent Quality

    The Administrative Council of the EPO does not appear to be interested in a serious, adult, scientific debate about the quality of European Patents (EPs) and is instead relaying lies from Benoît Battistelli



  27. Links 12/10/2017: Cutelyst 1.9.0, Qt Creator 4.5 Beta

    Links for the day



  28. The Hogwash Begins: Patent Microcosm's Media Pretends Campinos is Anything But Battistelli's French Succession Plan

    A survey of media coverage regarding António Campinos, the French person whom Benoît Battistelli selected as his successor at the EPO



  29. Patent Quality at the EPO (European Patents) is Slipping While Battistelli's Office Boasts “Expansion of Early Certainty” (Even Worse)

    The EPO is staring down the abyss as high-level EPO management, quite frankly as usual, looks for new ways to further exacerbate patent quality (for superficial gains in the number of granted patents) rather than improve it



  30. Former Microsoft Employee Explains Why Microsoft 'Embrace' of GNU/Linux and Free/Libre Open Source Software is Like W3C Entryism

    Microsoft's latest moves are "EEE" that "concern" him, according to this new video


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