Which Parts of the Disclosure Will Be Redacted?
- Dr. Roy Schestowitz
- 2007-05-25 06:56:49 UTC
- Modified: 2007-05-25 06:56:49 UTC
There is
an excellent insight over at Dana's open source blog. More interesting, however, is the conversation that follows. As you
may recall:
Novell will give more details of its patent deal with Microsoft, although the full story wouldn't be revealed as the company plans to redact some of the more sensitive details.
Which parts? Shane
pondered this yesterday. Among Dana's observations:
Novell faced such a choice six months ago. Microsoft offered it a fat check for its corporate soul.
Novell took the check.
Now it wants a do-over. Novell promises to (finally) share the full agreement.
The fact is that the full details of the agreement are not to be disclosed. This leads to the
following short thread. Let us wait and see... not what Novell discloses, but what it chooses to
hide. We impatiently wait. When
Steinman addressed BoycottNovell's questions, he said nothing about redactions.
Comments
Marcus Meissner
2007-05-25 07:13:16
Otherwise you could ask SCO for its deals with Microsoft etc.
It is just business practice.
Ciao, Marcus
Roy Schestowitz
2007-05-25 08:24:52
"If you compare the Dell prices to the official Canonical support prices, you will find that one year of support costs $250 direct from Canonical, and $275 if you buy it bundled with your Dell machine."
Source: http://useopensource.blogspot.com/2007/05/dell-helping-canonical-become.html
Allow me to add this: the "take action first, provide explanation later" approach is not understandable. Novell just signed an irrevocable deal that took everyone by surprise.
shane
2007-05-25 18:45:16
I've never understood why shareholders couldn't compel disclosure of stuff like this... If I am a shareholder in a company that is paying MS protection money based on spurious and unproven claims, I would like to know.