Microsoft's and Novell's shared
love is their jealousy/hatred of Red Hat
AN anonymous reader has just mailed us what he calls "the joint Novell-Microsoft vision." It is the text which describes an upcoming (21st of April) virtualisation seminar. It is organised by Microsoft, Novell, and possibly ANS and it takes place at Microsoft's Headquarters in Thames Valley Park, Reading. Here is how it's summarised:
Microsoft and Novell would like to extend to you a complimentary invitation to attend our half-day seminar on Windows and Linux Interoperability - "The Impact of Virtualisation on Reducing Complexity" At this summit, you and your peers will learn about the latest options for taking advantage of Windows and Linux interoperability to employ virtualisation, reduce systems overhead, and tame the complexity brought on by combining disparate environments. +
IPW: Does the recent case involving TomTom navigational devices and open-source software - in which Microsoft sued over patent infringement and TomTom sued back - represent the kind of business environment Microsoft promotes? Why or why not?
PHELPS: What happened here and has happened on a very few cases, is that MS had great difficulty getting attention from TomTom and was forced into action. There have been a couple of others and all were settled quickly as was TomTom. But, whatever business model a company follows, the IP it invents needs to be respected and sometimes it’s necessary to show you’re willing to defend your legal rights to force the issue. Some say this doesn’t apply to open source companies, but they’re wrong. Just try appropriating RedHat’s famous logo and see what happens.
KLINE: In fact, Red Hat has probably filed more IP suits than Microsoft has to protect their IP.
IPW: Is there anything else you would like to add?
PHELPS: What we’ve tried to do with “Burning the Ships” is take IP questions out of the realm of arcane debate among lawyers and show real people, in the midst of a highly dramatic internal struggle at Microsoft, learning how to deploy IP for tangible business benefit.
Comments
Andre
2009-04-09 11:54:40
I found the interview excellent because it exposes the ideology and strategy of Marshall Phelps which does not seem undisputed. Time will show if his shark model is sustainable for the software industry or will run it to the ground. Phelps represents an older generation of the industry. The article reveals that his views are not undisputed.
IPWatch is one of the best information services. It really needs our support. Why not abandon all communication of the institutions and dump the money on IPwatch and bloggers instead. I don't want to read WIPO press releases but an IPwatch article is almost informative.
What Roy can learn from IPwatch is high quality articles but quality has a price and sure, BN is more sensationalist. We will see which model will pay off in the end.
William New
2009-04-07 21:08:04
Roy Schestowitz
2009-04-07 21:15:51
As a reader of IPW, I hope to find balanced discussions that hopefully separate and distinguish between trademarks, copyrights, and patents. In this case, there was an attempt to blur the distinction and it went unchallenged.
May I suggest that you publish an interview with Red Hat about AMQP? We are still trying to decipher the company's view on patents in this area.
http://boycottnovell.com/2009/03/18/amqp-patents-red-hat/ http://boycottnovell.com/2009/03/17/red-hat-patent-fire/ http://boycottnovell.com/2009/03/21/novl-rht-software-patents/ http://boycottnovell.com/2009/03/22/red-hat-again-epo-and-uspto/ http://boycottnovell.com/2009/03/25/how-red-hat-dodged-a-novell-like-deal-despite-lobbying-for-software-patents/ http://boycottnovell.com/2009/03/29/red-hat-microsoft-eu-lobbyists/
NotZed
2009-04-08 01:23:12
At least this obvious and out-right falsehood could have been challenged.
William New
2009-04-08 07:00:11