02.03.13

While Laptops Bricked Due to Microsoft’s Anti-Linux Tactics, Media Spin About Microsoft Liking Linux

Posted in Deals, Dell, GNU/Linux, Microsoft at 8:47 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Dell the next Citrix/Apple/Novell

Summary: The UEFI damage is done and spinners try to sell the idea that Microsoft loves GNU/Linux

Dr. Garrett, a leading UEFI apologist, responds to some of the latest UEFI outrage and his opponents do so too. To quote one such opponent;

A number of Samsung laptops are dying after they are booted with a live-usb image of Ubuntu 12.04 using UEFI, according to information at the Ubuntu bug reporting site.

There are many articles about it, some from Microsoft apologists and many from the original source of this whole story, The H, which is based down in London.

Those rushing to fix it were former Novell developers (who had been paid by Microsoft through Novell to help promote Microsoft agenda in Linux) such as these two. Here is a new article on the subject:

Matthew Garrett has published some patches today out of which few break hibernate and kexec support on Linux when secure boot is running.

Released through a patch series titled Secure Boot: More controversial changes, the patches are known to break hibernate and kexec functionality “without providing any functional equivalent”. Garrett notes further “…, so I’m not suggesting that they be merged as-is.”

Here is another article:

Samsung laptops will no longer be irreparably destroyed when their users try to boot Linux on them, kernel chieftain Linus Torvalds made certain today.

Coincidentally, Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols complains about UEFI more than he did before.

Some Samsung laptops with UEFI will brick when you try to install Linux on them, others have problems, and the Linux Foundation is continuing to try to bring its fix for Windows 8 UEFI Secure Boot out.

Sam Varghese says that UEFI causes civil wars, which of course help Microsoft. He writes:

Could Microsoft’s implementation of secure boot be, one day, the reason why Linux vendors get into strife with each other? Could Oracle one day go to Microsoft in order to get a key issued to Red Hat by Microsoft revoked?

Kernel developer Matthew Garrett raised this possibility last year, within the context of a discussion that focused on the additional measures that have to be implemented for Linux systems to satisfy all the requirements of secure boot, so that there is no door left open for Microsoft to revoke the key issued to any Linux distribution.

Lance Whitney, a Microsoft booster, floats rumours that Microsoft might ‘pull an Apple’ (Microsoft added Apple to the cartel in the 90s) on another OEM. First it was Apple and now it’s Dell, which preinstalls GNU/Linux on some machines. Here is a response to some media spin:

Now we hear that Microsoft wants to lend a hand, as in “several billion dollars”. The forums buzz again: It’s just like when Bill Gates came to Jobs’ rescue and invested $150M in the Cupertino company, thus avoiding a liquidity crisis.

The analogy is amusing but facile. Dell 2013 isn’t Apple 1997. A look at Dell’s latest financials shows that the company still enjoys a solid cash position ($14B) and a profitable business (3.5% net profit margin). It’s profits may not be growing (-11% year to year), but the company is cash-flow positive nonetheless ($1.3B from the latest quarter). There’s no reason to fold up the tents.

As for Microsoft’s involvement: The Redmond company’s “investment” in Apple was part of a settlement of an on-going IP dispute. Microsoft avoided accusations of monopoly by keeping alive a highly visible but not overly dangerous adversary.

So what is Dell trying to accomplish by going private? To answer the question, let’s step back a bit and explore the whys and hows of such a move.

Novell was a similar story. Microsoft and Apple got Novell’s patents when it went private or sold. Don’t expect Dell to support GNU/Linux any more than Facebook does whilst partly owned by Microsoft.

What’s really disturbing is that amidst all these anti-Linux moves there is spin from Microsoft boosters like this one about Microsoft using Git. At IDG there is this report and a response from Simon Phipps, the OSI President, who writes:

By implementing Git in its developer tools, Microsoft is using GPL-licensed software — and perhaps ending its war on open source

This is not true, Just like Xamarin with Mono, Moonlight, and MonoDevelop, all we see here is the openwashing of Visual Studio. Don’t try to associate this with Linux because the program does not even run on Linux and don’t call it Linux-style because it’s all about Windows.

Microsoft continues to hate Linux, and by extension FOSS too. The actions speak for themselves. █

“We should whack them [Dell over GNU/Linux dealings], we should make sure they understand our value.”

–Paul Flessner, Microsoft

Permalink Leave Your Comment      Send this to a friend

08.07.12

Backroom Deals Gave Microsoft Europe

Posted in Antitrust, Deals, Deception, Europe, Microsoft, Open XML, OpenDocument at 4:22 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Summary: How dirty dealings in Europe have been benefiting the convicted monopolist from Redmond, United States

THE always-excellent journalism from Mark Ballard helps expose injustices in Europe. His latest output says that “Europe’s ill-fated 1993 migration to Microsoft Office was rubber-stamped by a committee that failed to see how it would get locked into buying Microsoft without a competition for the next 20 years, show documents released to Computer Weekly.

“The European Commission used dubious reasoning to justify its decision in 1992 to do a backroom deal with Microsoft. Officials at the time said it was based on a survey of the wordprocessing market. But they took that as justification for buying Microsoft’s entire Office suite – with spreadsheet, presentation, email and database software – without opening the business up to any other competitor. And it threw the desktop operating systems DOS and Windows in as well.

“The European Commission used dubious reasoning to justify its decision in 1992 to do a backroom deal with Microsoft.”
      –Mark Ballard“”Under the provisions of Article 58 of the Financial Regulation, [the selection procedure] was carried by direct negotiation with the company Microsoft Corporation, owner of the goods concerned (MS-WORD FOR WINDOWS, EXCEL, and operating systems DOS and Windows),” said the EC Information Directorate at the time.

“”The proposed contract with the company MICROSOFT will also extend to other office products offered by the company and are regularly requested from the Commission.”

“The EC was effectively giving Microsoft its desktop monopoly on a plate.”

Simon Phipps, who is now the OSI President, blasts “biased buying” which he blames for the slow adoption of Free software. He, like Ballard, is a Brit, so his analysis is EU-centric. He writes: “The market for public services is very large – almost 20% of Europe’s GDP in 2009 – and continues to grow. It’s consequently a valuable source of business and provides an economic stimulus to Europe that’s far more significant than any individual initiative a government might devise.

“It’s thus in Europe’s interest to ensure that market is as open as possible, so that the effects of the “stimulus package” of public procurement can benefit any qualified player. That’s especially the case in ICT, where there’s a tendency for legacy US vendors to lock in customers and thus lock out European participants.

“How do you do open procurement for ICT solutions? The answer, according to the European Commission, is to ensure that all procurement that requires tendering (and not all does) is specified in terms of the functions required rather than expressing a preference for the brands involved in the solution. That makes huge sense and is likely to create an open, competitive market, with all the cost savings you’d expect.”

“Antitrust action should be invoked.”Mr. Pogson, over in Canada, unearths some Comes vs. Microsoft exhibit to show the ill effects of the monopoly. “For decades,” he explain, Microsoft “has enslaved all of its customers, “partners” and ISVs (Independent Software Vendors). They have all been enlisted to prop up the monopoly in PC operating systems. The ISVs, while supposedly independent, were made dependent by offering “inside information”, special APIs to give advantages over competitors, lots of software-creation tools and, of course, backwards compatibility.”

This limited competition and impeded integration work, motivating bundled purchases and never-ending lock-in. In order to escape lock-in, ODF was introduced, but as we recently learned, it was not doing so well after Microsoft had embraced and ‘extended’ it too.

Speaking as one who works for a Free software integrator in the UK, this affects me personally and professionally. Microsoft has blocked competitors using backroom deals, technical sabotage, and digestion of threats. I saw it for myself; so have many who read this site. Antitrust action should be invoked. █

Permalink A Single Comment      Send this to a friend

02.24.11

Only US Department of Justice and German Federal Cartel Office Can Really Stop AttachMSFT Deal

Posted in Deals, Microsoft, Novell, Patents at 6:48 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Summary: Novell’s passing of patents to Microsoft et al. is likely to be the only barrier to Novell’s sale

A COUPLE of new posts, composed by Fabian Scherschel and Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols (SJVN), say a little more about Novell’s claim of getting stockholders’ approval. We wrote about this three days ago, emphasising that several barriers remain (although lawsuits can be resolved by settlement with compensation rather than total withdrawal from the deal). SJVN’s analysis of this is exceptionally comprehensive and relies a great deal on Groklaw:

Novell, which as Pamela Jones of Groklaw points out now describes itself as “the leader in intelligent workload management,” instead of the producers of “best engineered, most interoperable Linux platform.,” still faces anti-trust inquires from both the German Federal Cartel Office and the U.S. Department of Justice.

Neither of these agencies are concerned about Attachmate a formerly obscure software company buying Novell with Microsoft financing. No, the governments; concerns are about Novell’s patents landing in the hands of CPTN Holdings-a company made up of Microsoft, Apple, EMC and Oracle.

For Attachmate to end up with Novell, the patent deal must go through. If Microsoft and friends don’t end up with the patents because of government intervention then the Attachmate deal is dead. Or, as Novell explains it: “The patent sale to CPTN remains subject to the satisfaction or waiver of closing conditions, including receipt of antitrust approval in the United States and Germany. As previously disclosed, Novell and CPTN received a request for additional information from the Antitrust Division of the United States Department of Justice regarding the patent sale. The requests have the effect of extending the waiting period under the Hart-Scott-Rodino Antitrust Improvements Act of 1976 until 30 days after both parties have substantially complied with the requests, unless the waiting period is earlier terminated. Novell is in the process of gathering information to respond to this request and is continuing to cooperate fully with the Department of Justice in connection with its review. Novell continues to work toward completing the merger as quickly as possible and currently anticipates that the closing of the merger will occur following the completion of the waiting period and the satisfaction of other closing conditions.”

Microsoft MVP and Novell VP Miguel de Icaza is meanwhile expressing DRM tolerance:

I do not mind DRM that much. It sucks when it gets in the way, but all software gets in the way anyways. I like the benefits of it.

Sure he does. Would he not love it if Microsoft took even more control of Novell? It would make him stronger, richer, and more influential. Miguel works for Miguel (and Steve), not for Free software. █

“DRM is the future.”

–Steve Ballmer, Microsoft CEO

Permalink Leave Your Comment      Send this to a friend

01.11.11

AttachMSFT Needs to Borrow More Money to Buy Novell

Posted in Deals, Finance, Novell at 7:29 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Summary: AttachMSFT [sic] does not have enough money to complete an acquisition of Novell, so it is reaching out for a loan

IN THE coming days we shall cover the AttachMSFT acquisition of Novell and the barriers which remain, including the important fall of the CPTN deal and the many lawsuits from investors. One of the lesser-discussed barriers is actually financial and according to this report from Bloomberg:

Attachmate Corp., the connectivity solutions provider owned by private-equity firms, is seeking $1.09 billion in loans to finance its acquisition of Novell Inc.

Attachmate is seeking an $825 million first-lien term loan, a $40 million first-lien revolving line of credit and a $225 million second-lien facility, Waltham, Massachusetts-based Novell said today in a regulatory filing.

This was echoed by [1, 2, 3] and for some more recently-written background:

6. Novell, the Waltham open-source software developer that once called Utah home, finally found a mate in Attachmate last month, following an eight-month strategic review. The Seattle firm shelled out $2.2 billion for Novell.

There is a lot more to be said about this planned takeover, but that is a subject for future posts. We still have a backlog of about 20 posts. █

Permalink Leave Your Comment      Send this to a friend

12.17.10

New Details Surface About Novell/Microsoft/AttachMSFT [sic] Deal

Posted in Apple, Deals, Microsoft, Novell, Oracle, Patents at 2:47 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Summary: The real face of CPTN, the entity which got Novell’s software patents; more revelations about how Novell’s deal came about

WE HAVE written over 20 posts about the subject since Novell was sold (despite impending litigation) and it was never known to the full extent just what Novell did and where assets were being passed. First there was turmoil over the assumption that Microsoft may have acquired UNIX from Novell. Shortly after Novell was publicly flogged for it the CMO of the company came out with an important statement denying this claim (AttachMSFT [sic] might still sell UNIX though). It was still assumed at the time that CPTN was merely a Microsoft shell [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7] as no company other than Microsoft was named as a member. Well, none until now anyway. A group of Microsoft proponents [1, 2] says that Apple, Oracle and EMC are also part of CPTN (not principal ones though) and Groklaw theorises that it’s ill-intended and dangerous to Linux. From its new post on the subject:

So what’s the common interest? “Let’s all kill Android”? There’s a limit on that, in that Google is also an Open Invention Network member, so it has a license to these Novell patents already. Of course there could be more than one theme, virtualization, office suites.

Don’t forget that if you sign up with Open Invention Network before this deal closes, you will have a license in perpetuity to all those patents, and more, and these Machiavellian dudes won’t be able to mess with you. Here’s the article that provides information on where to sign up and who qualifies and what is required.

By the way, Oracle is a member of OIN, so it knows how it works. If it wanted to prevent patent litigation, all it had to do was buy all the patents. So I will assume they plan to use these patents, claiming they belong to the consortium and are therefore not donated to the OIN pool. Alternatively, looking at matters more positively, perhaps it wished to exercise some control over what Microsoft does with the patents.

Groklaw also thinks it’s an anti-Android plot despite the fact that VMware recently released software for Android and all we know about Oracle-Apple is not a sufficiently strong link [1, 2, 3, 4]. Moreover, Oracle has too much to lose if it harms Linux (Solaris notwithstanding). Groklaw is very familiar with the SCOracle [sic] case, which it has been tracking quite closely so far, so Groklaw’s opinion is nothing to sneeze at. From the latest status report at Groklaw:

The Oracle v. Google Java litigation now begins in earnest, with each side offering a proposed protective order, along with a handy table of the disputed provisions. Say, I think Groklaw has a claim for prior art on that kind of table.

Could some rival of Android have motivated Oracle to sue? It’s not possible to tell with any conviction at this moment. The same goes for the Traul Allen case from Interval — a case that was dismissed [1, 2] but Groklaw declared the end of it before it was over for good. By the way, the MSBBC’s coverage of this dismissal was atrocious, as expected. It even glamourised Traul Allen for this pathological, irrational, antisocial behaviour.

In addition to the news about CPTN, there is also news from the VAR Guy, who sheds lights on what exactly was going on behind the scenes when Novell looked for buyers:

Overall, Novell representatives contacted 52 potential buyers. Roughly nine official bidders emerged. So how did Attachmate wind up buying the bulk of Novell’s assets? And what happened to rumored SUSE Linux bids from VMware? In a preliminary proxy statement dated December 14, Novell offers an extensive time line describing how the company’s board of directors, executive team, and external financial advisors pursued potential buyers for the company. The filing is more than 100 pages. Here are some of the highlights, paraphrased by The VAR Guy. Please note:

* The vast majority of the info below is based on information within Novell’s SEC filing.
* Novell protects the names of several bidders, referring to them as Party A through Party E. In some cases, The VAR Guy makes some educated guesses about the actual identity of each company. But The VAR Guy’s educated guesses could be wrong.

Regarding anti-Android lawsuits, Mac Asay [sic] wrote this new article where he claims the lawsuit are evidence of Linux and open source success (it is embedded in almost everything).

Google came up with two on its own – Android and Chrome OS – to cover its bases on encouraging geeks to contribute to Google’s total world domination. And while Chrome OS never quite got out the gate in 2010, despite assurances that it would ship in late fall, Android more than made up for Chrome OS’ delays, with Google’s Andy Rubin tweeting: “There are over 300,000 Android phones activated each day.”

That’s a heck of a lot of phones running open source. Even more than Apple ships.

Apple, of course, didn’t let this open-source momentum go unnoticed, and launched a lawsuit against Google’s Android through its licensee, HTC. Not to be outdone, Microsoft and Oracle also sent lawyers to the Googleplex. About the only company that didn’t is Research in Motion. Nice Canadians.

Not only Linux is a target of such mobile phone lawsuits. There are more new lawsuits right now and they come from Symbian giant Nokia to apply pressure on Apple:

Nokia has just released a press release announcing that it has filed claims in the UK, Germany and Holland, alleging that Apple has infringed on Nokia products sold in those respective countries in regards to technologies used it the iPhone, iPad and iPod Touch.

In response, writes Rupert Goodwins (UK-based journalist): “I find this profoundly depressing. Does history mean nothing in the face of short-term reactive capitalism?

The patent lawyers are watching this carefully (still afraid of losing software patents) and TechDirt jokes that creating flight plans on the Internet is now patented. Hilarious! Sane judges can view this as further evidence of BM/SW patents needing abolition.

Thanks to Kiran Lightpaw for alerting us to yet another example of patents being used to stifle innovation, rather than enable it. It involves a company called FlightPrep, that secured a patent (7,640,098) a year ago, covering generating a flight plan online and filing it online. Basically, it’s one of your typical “just add online and patent it!” patents that never should have been granted. In fact, the patent, which was first applied for in 2001 was rejected repeatedly, and many adjustments had to be made before the patent examiner finally gave them the patent.

Once they got the patent, they apparently started hitting up all sorts of online flightplan services for licenses — even ones that appear to have been online predating some of the claims in their patent. Nelson Minar, who knows more than a little bit about software development, does a nice job highlighting that there appears to be a fair bit of prior art to the claims that were actually approved.

Free software would have won far more easily if there were no software patents, which cannot be justified on economic grounds anyway. Everyone needs to demand elimination of software patents to hasten development and research efforts. Patents help society as much as Wall Street does. █

Permalink Leave Your Comment      Send this to a friend

11.27.10

Microsoft Sellouts Join Microsoft’s Racket Intellectual Ventures and Not OIN

Posted in Deals, GNU/Linux, Microsoft, Patents, Samsung at 3:55 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

“I’d put the Linux phenomenon really as threat No. 1.”

–Steve Ballmer, 2001

Summary: Samsung signs a patent deal with the world’s biggest patent troll, Intellectual Ventures (which serves Microsoft’s agenda)

Earlier today we wrote about HTC feeding the vultures of Intellectual Ventures, which is somewhat of a Microsoft spinoff and also the world’s biggest patent troll. It’s rather mysterious and we suspect that HTC did not join voluntarily, so maybe it happened after threat of litigation, even by proxy (Intellectual Ventures always sues through one of its 1,000+ satellites). Both Microsoft and Intellectual Ventures use attack dogs to distance themselves from the negative publicity associated with lawsuits. Why did Microsoft and Gates want Intellectual Ventures created in the first place? The founder too came from Microsoft. Perhaps Microsoft can use such a proxy to repeatedly extort companies and elevate the price of its competition, which is gratis under conditions where software patents are not valid.

According to this new report, Samsung decides to “Partner Up With Intellectual Ventures”:

In a move to help steer clear of any more legal trouble, HTC and Samsung have entered into a partnership with Intellectual Ventures to use over 30,000 software patents in their phones, and in Samsung’s case, a myriad of other devices. This is especially handy for HTC who’s faced nothing but legal trouble since they spearheaded the Android movement back in 2008.

HTC sold out to Microsoft some months ago and then signed an Intellectual Ventures deal; Samsung too follows this path, having surrendered to Microsoft without even a fight (in 2007), deciding to pay Microsoft for Linux. Samsung could possibly join the OIN instead of joining the Microsoft racket, but Microsoft and Samsung have resemblances and a long history together (as partners). As shown in the very recent conversation below (full log to be published later), our contributor gnufreex has some ideas about the purpose of OIN and CPTN, which we will write about tomorrow. █

Permalink Leave Your Comment      Send this to a friend

10.08.10

Microsoft Pays Acacia Again and It Also Pays ACCESS Co.

Posted in Deals, GNU/Linux, LG, Microsoft, Patents, Red Hat at 6:51 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Handouts from Microsoft

Summary: Software patents proponents share their wealth while companies that bring free/libre software to the market get sued

PATENT TROLL Acacia has been agitating Linux for almost exactly three years now and a few days ago it made a settlement announcement regarding Red Hat [1, 2, 3]. Microsoft paid Acacia some months ago and it’s paying it again based on Murdoch’s press and Mary Jo Foley who writes:

Sometimes it’s cheaper to head off a potential problem than fight — a stance the old Microsoft regime would repudiate, but one that the current one increasingly has been pursuing.

On October 7, Microsoft licensed 74 patents for an undisclosed amount with Acacia Research Corp. and Access Co. Ltd, the Japanese company that acquired PalmSource, the maker of the Palm operating system, according to a report in the Wall Street Journal.

Notice the role of ACCESS in there. André Rebentisch from the FFII warned us last year about the patent pools ACCESS or LiMo were getting into. The company was pro-software patents and patent trolls are now using similar tactics to merely extort competitors. It’s a good thing that ALP is dead given the damage its staff was causing to software freedom. “Microsoft pays Acacia,” I pointed out to Glyn Moody, adding that “Groklaw perceives that as Microsoft rewarding those ex-Softies who work in Acacia and sue Red Hat et al.” Moody did not rule out the possibility of it being a factor.

“Acacia has been good to Microsoft as it helped generate Linux FUD for several years, just like SCO did.”Isn’t it fascinating how money can change hands through settlements? Microsoft did not even challenge this, it immediately paid. Acacia has been good to Microsoft as it helped generate Linux FUD for several years, just like SCO did.

In other news, now that Microsoft extorts Android, LG (with a Microsoft patent deal covering Linux) drops some of its Android plans and just a couple of days later initiates a Microsoft co-operation. A reader of ours from Latvia sent us this link. It turns out that some of those companies which signed Linux patent deals with Microsoft were actually quietly sued but settled before this was made publicly known. Melco is reportedly one of those. That’s just racketeering [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7] and it’s where Microsoft seems to be going. █

Permalink Leave Your Comment      Send this to a friend

09.20.10

Centrify and Microsoft Grow Closer With a Software Patents Agreement

Posted in Deals, FUD, GNU/Linux, Microsoft, Patents at 5:35 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Summary: New evidence of the patent trouble which is Centrify

EARLIER this month we wrote about Centrify [1, 2, 3] getting sued for patent violation. Some days ago Centrify strengthened its relationship with Microsoft, too.

“Patent Agreement” called it the press release [1, 2] and Centrify’s many problems are a subject we covered before. In short, as we argued back in January, Centrify is strengthening Microsoft’s patent FUD against GNU/Linux. █

Permalink Leave Your Comment      Send this to a friend