05.21.07

Novell/Microsoft Debate and Unwanted Consequences

Posted in GPL, Meeting, Microsoft, Novell, Patents, Ubuntu at 7:25 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Coming soon is a debate on the impact of the Novell-Microsoft deal. The manager of a company whose product handles software licence compliance will take the lead. Recently, his company, which is called Black Duck, received a some attention owing to the gentle GPLv2-GPv3 clashes. It is something that this new article explores as well.

Another point Vasile makes to clients is that open source doesn’t mean anti-commercial. “That’s a big misconception,” he said. “Under the GPL, if you want to charge for software, you can. However, you then have obligations.”

Mainly, if you charge for GPL software, you must keep the core open. “If you get GPL code, modify it, and sell it, you have to give the people you sell it to the same rights you received. Your customers must be able to copy, modify, and distribute without difficulty,” he said.

This, in fact, is an interesting key point which, according to Moglen, has left Microsoft exoposed to nasty consequences. It almost makes Novell’s deal a beneficial one. And as far as risk goes, Ubuntu’s founder argues that patent trolls are the greatest threat, not predatory deals. He is also certain that Microsoft will have nothing by scare tactics to offer as a weapon.

In short, Microsoft will lose a patent trench war if they start one, and I’m sure that cooler heads in Redmond know that.

Permalink Comments off      Send this to a friend

01.23.07

Novell/Microsoft Meeting: Mini Summary

Posted in Intellectual Monopoly, Meeting, Microsoft, Novell, Patents at 4:26 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Amid the latest discussion at Groklaw, some interesting information is becoming public. To quote bits of interest:

1. Both Nat Friedman and Miguel de Icaza are reported to have visited Microsoft to say that the patent agreement as written isn’t acceptable, and Microsoft said itself publicly that a change was needed. Where is the rewrite? When might we expect it? What will the changes be?

[...]

3. For Novell: You promised the community that you would use your patent portfolio to protect Linux. Now you ally with this Microsoft statement, that the deal is “enabling both companies to recognize commercial value from their respective patent portfolios.” Why did you break that promise? Do you care that the majority of the FOSS community is opposed to software patents? How do you reconcile the clear intent of GPLv2 that no restrictions, such as a patent license, can be added to the GPL and what you signed?

Permalink 2 Comments      Send this to a friend