Looking back at some older material and putting pieces together, the following shall illustrate that Novell willfully gave Microsoft just what it had wanted -- anti-Linux FUD (even, potentially, "innovation tax" and "interoperability tax"). Novell must have realised what it was doing. It must have known about the consequences. Maybe it perceived the FUD-to-come as a competitive advantage to Novell.

Here is one thing that Ron Hovsepian, Novell's CEO, said in the press conference in November, right after the deal had been signed:

"As Brad [Smith] had highlighted, we do have our own portfolio of our intellectual property and that was very important in the relationship as well."

In other words, Novell used its intellectual property to balance it against something else. 2-3 weeks later, both sides responded in order to clarify (they contradicted one another). Let's not forget, however, how Microsoft has used this patent deal as the very solid backing for its claims. To repeat some facts:

In mid-November, shortly after the pact was announced, Microsoft chief Steve Ballmer said companies that sell or run Linux, but aren’t covered under the Novell deal, are illegally using Microsoft’s IP. “We believe every Linux customer basically has an undisclosed balance-sheet liability,” he said.

He said in a later meeting: “I do think it [Novell deal] clearly establishes that open source is not free.”

We all have Novell to thank for statements like these. Whether the statements are valid or not, some people read them and believe them.