10.04.09

IRC: #boycottnovell @ FreeNode: October 4th, 2009

Posted in IRC Logs at 6:51 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Read the log

Enter the IRC channel now

To use your own IRC client, join channel #boycottnovell in FreeNode.

Permalink Comments off      Send this to a friend

Links 04/10/2009: New X Server, Nexuiz, Arora, OpenSSH, Perl

Posted in News Roundup at 5:53 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Digital Tipping Point: Clip of the Day

Internet Video Celebrity Caitlin Hill 07 (2007)

Digital Tipping Point is a Free software-like project where the raw videos are code. You can assist by participating.

Permalink Comments off      Send this to a friend

Patents Roundup: Uniloc Appeals Microsoft’s Dodge, OpenGL 3 Patent Issues Rear Ugly Head, Apple Innovates Crippleware

Posted in Apple, Google, Law, Microsoft, Patents at 10:13 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Summary: As the title suggests, this is a mishmash of software patent news

THIS is just a quick overview of patent news we haven’t sufficient time to cover thoroughly.

Uniloc-Microsoft

The Uniloc case was previously mentioned here in [1, 2, 3, 4]. The press marks the overturn of a ruling against Microsoft like it did with Alcatel-Lucent about a fortnight ago, but although Uniloc suffers this setback [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6], the situation may be temporary because an appeal from the plaintiff is coming. The story is not over yet and it helps in exposing Microsoft's hypocrisy on the patent issue. To quote this finding from Groklaw:

“A simple comparison of MD5 as a whole to the algorithm Uniloc’s patent discloses clearly reveals non-equivalence,” Judge Smith ruled. “While the existence of additional components or different steps does not per se preclude a structure from being considered substantially the same as another structure, the various non-additive mathematical operations in MD5 demonstrate significant (and undisputed) differences between MD5 and the summation algorithm in the ’216 patent [for Uniloc], which cannot be overstated. For example, the compressive, circular shifting and mixing functions fundamentally create a more secure result compared to an algorithm based in summation as the specification discloses. Indeed, the unchallenged evidence was that MD5′s hallmark is the variety of its logical and mathematical steps to obtain a more secure result. This complexity highlights the advantage of an irreversible one-way function with a fixed output, instead of an algorithm that uses a single type of reversible operation (with no fixed output), such as that disclosed in the patent.”

Will we see software patents as a whole invalidated any time soon? All eyes on In Re Bilski.

OpenGL 3

The FSF has warned about it for quite some time. As Heise and Phoronix put it, the patent issues in OpenGL 3 already affect Mesa.

While work on OpenGL 3.x support in Mesa has been very slow, many have been looking forward to the day when Gallium3D hardware drivers provide fast acceleration and a OpenGL 3 state tracker to provide this support to all Gallium3D users. Intel though has also been wanting to bring some OpenGL 3 support to the classic Mesa stack. However, at XDC2009, Intel’s Ian Romanick has expressed some issues with patents that could inhibit the support.

Not to worry though. A solution is currently being worked out in the mailing lists.

[I]t looks like the Linux Foundation could get involved along with the Open Invention Network (OIN) to hopefully reach a proper agreement with the patent/IP holders. Greg Kroah-Hartman brought this 3D patent issue up with the Linux Foundation Technical Advisory Board to see what can be done. At this time they are still setting up a meeting.

Misc.

In other patent news, Apple gets caught patenting yet another customer-hostile idea. Microsoft does this too.

Evil is in the eye of the beholder, but there’s certainly not much to like in the newly-disclosed Apple patent applications for Systems and Methods for Provisioning Computing Devices. Provisioning, says Apple, allows carriers to ‘specify access limitations to certain device resources which may otherwise be available to users of the device.’ So what problem are we trying to solve here? ‘Mobile devices often have capabilities that the carriers do not want utilized on their networks,’ explains Apple. ‘Various applications on these devices may also need to be restricted.’

Here is another new example of a customer-hostile patent.

That Whole Watch An Ad To Get Content Thing? Patented… And The Patent Holder Has Been Suing

[...]

So we were just talking about some new company called Free All Music, which has a plan to let people download free mp3s if they agree to watch a video ad first. I have my doubts about how well it would work… but apparently the company may also need to watch out for another issue: a bogus patent.

Speaking of bogus patents, Patently-O has this post about use of patent reexaminations to remove barriers.

Most patents currently being reexamined at the PTO are also being litigated in parallel proceedings in district court. This rise in importance of parallel reexaminations leads directly to both Constitutional controversies and practical problems. Although the Federal Circuit has nimbly attempted to avoid the problem, the truth is that both the PTO (an Article II executive agency) and the Article III Courts focus on the same question of validity of patent claims. These races to conclusion raise questions of both separation of powers and res judicata.

Google and Adobe get sued by a company called Textscape. It’s a software patent, but not a patent troll.

It looks like at least a few of Google’s lawyers who specialize in patent law are about to get some work to do. Google – along with Adobe – has been sued by a company named Textscape because the search giant allegedly violated a patent Textscape was granted in 1998.

Will this lawsuit be beneficial to anyone other than patent lawyers? Probably not. In its latest essay on the subject, TechDirt insists that patents only ever harm innovation.

There are plenty of reasons why people might believe patents increase innovation — but they’re the same theories of the mercantilists in the 18th century, who believed that monopolies on other products spurred more development in those businesses. That theory was debunked and is considered laughable by pretty much any economist today. And yet, when it comes to patents, why do people automatically reject what economists realized two hundred years ago? Monopolies may temporarily benefit the monopolist, but at the expense of society as a whole.

Also see:

• It’s Official: Patents Stifle Innovation
• Patents Roundup: Patents Harm Innovation (Again), Government Intervenes in Bilski Case and Still Hides ACTA
• Rob Tiller Explains Why Software Patents Are a Tax on Innovation (Video)
• Patents Roundup: Software Patents Seen as Harmful to Innovation, Tuxera Discussion Continues
• Routes to Innovation: Innovation by Publicity
• The Great Microsoft Innovation Lie (and Software Patent News)

Patents do harm innovation if respectable economists and engineers are asked about it; lawyers and monopolies, on the other hand, are self serving, so the more intellectual monopolies, the more business the former receives and the more protection the latter receives. █

“IP is often compared to physical property rights but knowledge is fundamentally different.”

–IP Watch on Professor Joseph Stiglitz

Permalink Comments off      Send this to a friend

Microsoft Spreads Intellectual Monopoly Law in Europe and Arab States; EFF Takes on Acacia

Posted in Asia, Europe, Intellectual Monopoly, Law, Microsoft, Patents at 8:20 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Summary: The Community patent keeps marching, Jean-Philippe Courtois lobbies for the Lisbon Treaty, and Microsoft brings intellectual monopolies to The League of Arab States

THE FFII has been warning for well over a year now that unification was means for legalising software patents in Europe. Fingers were pointing at Commissioner McCreevy, who constantly brings up the Community patent [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]. Axel H. Horns has this update about the Community patent, which remains a big threat to Free software in this continent.

It should not be overlooked that the entire project of an enhanced patent system in Europe is currently set on hold because of the pending referral for the Unified Patent Litigation System to the ECJ.

One of the pivotal figures in Microsoft's lobbying for software patents in Europe is Jean-Philippe Courtois, who also personally participated in blocking migrations to GNU/Linux by dumping [1, 2, 3, 4]. “Linux is obviously a key competitor,” Courtois once wrote to his colleagues. Watch him now as he lobbies for the terrible Lisbon Treaty, which is about “innovation and competitiveness” (being code names for patents).

BUSINESS GROUPS: THE MICROSOFT executive who runs the software company’s business outside of the US and Canada is the latest high-profile business leader to come out in favour of passing the Lisbon Treaty.

Jean-Philippe Courtois, president of Microsoft International, said it was “very important” not just for Ireland but for Europe as a whole that the treaty is ratified.

“We have a shift of power between China, Brazil, the Indias of the world and the US,” said Mr Courtois. “Europe needs to step up both economically speaking and politically speaking. That treaty has to be clearly embodied and move on with all the citizens in Europe.”

The above article from the Irish Times ought to show why Microsoft is the problem. It wasn’t long ago that we wrote about what Microsoft does in Ireland [1, 2], including the creation of "Microsoft IP Ventures" over there (not to be confused with Nathan Myhrvold’s Intellectual Ventures [1, 2]). Microsoft is now doing to The League of Arab States something quite similar:

The League of Arab States, Microsoft Corp. and Khasawneh & Associates (a member of KSLG) today announced the launch of the Arab Intellectual Property Centre, an online portal which will provide a central hub for best practice sharing and legal resources on intellectual property in the Arab region.

Shortly after Microsoft got caught marketing anti-GNU/Linux patents to patent trolls [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6] we find that the EFF gets its way against Acacia.

Ten claims from the Acacia Research Streaming Media Patent have been invalidated by the U.S.District Court for the Northern District of California. The Court invalidated the remaining claims that had been asserted in the litigation, after several others had been dropped from the suit by Acacia. EFF was not involved in the case, which was brought by Acacia against leading satellite and cable companies, Echostar, DirectTV, Time Warner Cable and CSC Holdings, Inc. Similar claims in related patents will also be invalid under the Court’s analysis.

As a reminder, Acacia is patent troll that sued GNU/Linux vendors shortly after adding Microsoft seniors to its staff. That’s why we follow people’s actions and professional history so closely. █

Permalink Comments off      Send this to a friend

Microsoft Interjects Itself into Free Software Using Novell

Posted in Free/Libre Software, GNU/Linux, Google, Microsoft, Mono, Novell, Patents, Samsung at 7:21 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Summary: A roundup of new cases where Microsoft imposes its presence and dependency using its people at Novell

AS mentioned in the previous post, Jason from the Mono-Nono Web site was unimpressed by this latest Mono promotion from Novell. Along the lines of the epic “Got Milk?” slogan, Novell’s marketing team publishes “Got Mono?”

Also discussed was the upcoming Monospace Conference on October 27 – 30 in Austin, Texas. The conference teaches .NET software developers and organizations how to use the Mono framework and Microsoft .NET to leverage existing investments in skills and applications on a broader array of platforms for a broader array of opportunities.

Here is another new post from Miguel de Icaza, who currently endorses a site that attacks Boycott Novell (Miguel also says that Richard Stallman is “misinformed since he refuses to use the web”).

As usual, I will be talking about Mono. But since Mono is an giant universe, I would like to know what the audience would like to hear about.

He carries on ignoring the technical/legal problems and as the Mono-Nono Web site correctly points out, there is no real comment on the betrayal of Novell and Moonlight (due to Moblin [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6]).

I’m just wondering when Team Mono is going to comment on Microsoft bringing Silverlight to Moblin?

Moblin’s likelihood of software patents is a real issue and Silver Lie’s inclusion is not good news to GNU/Linux. As Groklaw put it, “may I ask why *you* would want a proprietary, binary-only app on your Linux?”

The Novell employee who created and maintains Tomboy has announced version 1.0 of this principal Mono injection vector and Novell exploits SUSE’s mainframe domination to spread Mono into more servers along with Microsoft software.

It seems simple: The recently released Mono Extension of Novell SUSE Linux Enterprise Server (SLES) 11 allows Microsoft Visual Studio users to generate SUSE Linux versions of their Windows applications that run on ASP.NET.

Not just mainframe servers are being infiltrated by Microsoft. Web servers too (Apache to be precise [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17]) have Microsoft push its proprietary software into them. This new post from a Microsoft employee shows how Microsoft pushes its own stuff into Apache, just as observers warned from the very start.

What we’ve done is a Windows Communication Foundation (WCF) Channel for AMQP. Our goal is to provide a first class AMQP experience for the .NET developer. And, since this is an Apache project we’re talking about, all our code is obviously open source.

DotNetNuke, a Microsoft-esque ‘ripoff’ of PHP-Nuke, is another case of countering LAMP servers. Like Novell, DotNetNuke received a special place at Microsoft’s table (the CodePlex Foundation [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]). Amid some changes at the top come the following comments from Groklaw, regarding this article which is titled “Microsoft’s CodePlex Foundation leader soaks in stinging critique.”

“Behind the scenes (private correspondence) we already see how Groklaw is being smeared for its criticism of Miguel and Mono.”Pamela Jones writes: “Let me guess. After that, we will be favored with Gartner reports on how the GPL is no longer the most popular license; rather Microsoft’s “OSI approved” licenses are now the most popular. And so Microsoft takes one more step toward its announced goal, that FOSS applications run on Windows instead of the Linux kernel. Miguel is serving on the board of this foundation. Get the message?”

There is also Black Duck Software, which is derived from Microsoft to privately track software licences and funnel in everything from CodePlex as it already does. This trajectory was long coming [1, 2]. Regarding another article about the CodePlex Foundation, Jones writes: “Let me speculate: the business challenge of how to pretend to be open source without actually playing by the rules? Remember the old joke? How many Microsoft employees does it take to screw in a lightbulb? None. Microsoft redefines Darkness (TM) to be the new industry standard..”

Behind the scenes (private correspondence) we already see how Groklaw is being smeared for its criticism of Miguel and Mono. Some of the smears are more public and Miguel’s friend Jeff Waugh calls me a “motherfucker” in support of an attack site which “faux” 'open source' people have created against Boycott Novell. Their attempt at a shotgun wedding with Microsoft/proprietary software is not working out.

Going back to the issue at hand, there is also the LiMo/Samsung phone which needs to be avoided because it's part of a software patents racket. Fortunately, as the following new article implies, LiMo gets its behind kicked by Android, so this Microsoft-taxed phone from Samsung is unlikely to gain much traction.

The idea of an open source software platform for mobile devices hasn’t made much commercial headway yet – as sales for Google’s Android system attest – but Samsung Electronics is about to give it a try.

Samsung’s deal with Microsoft is similar to Novell’s, so Samsung’s failure would be wonderful news for GNU/Linux and a disaster to Microsoft’s plan against it. █

Permalink Comments off      Send this to a friend

Amicus Avalanche Opposing Software Patents in the United States (Novell Still Missing)

Posted in Courtroom, FSF, IBM, Law, Novell, Patents, Red Hat at 6:09 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Summary: Red Hat, the FSF, and the SFLC submit amicus briefs for the Bilski case

NOW there is a real chance of ending software patents. Here is a summary of older Bilski briefs and here is a newer list which can also be found at the ABA Web site.

Bilski v. Kappos, Under Sec’y of Commerce for Intellectual Prop. and Dir., Patent and Trademark Office, Docket No. 08-964

So who are the latest filers to oppose software patents? Not Novell of course; Novell is busy applying for more software patents [1, 2]. Red Hat, on the other hand, wants to put an end to this practice, so let’s start with the amicus brief from them.

Red Hat

The most major submission in terms of impact was the one from Red Hat. The company advanced it with a press release, which was followed by coverage from Brian Proffitt (Linux Foundation) and a variety of other Web sites.

David Neal writes in The Inquirer:

Red Hat argues that “patent trolls” have exploited the current legal system, and are developing lawsuits that make the most of the confusion surrounding the hundreds of thousands of patents that “cover abstract technology in vague and difficult-to-interpret terms”.

Here is the perspective of Red Hat’s CEO:

What if you could develop software without risking a patent infringement lawsuit?

What if open source innovation was unencumbered by lurking patent trolls?

What if there were no software patents?

The United States Supreme Court will be reviewing the Bilski case in the coming weeks. The Court’s decision in this case could help move some of these “what ifs” closer to reality.

IDG writes:

Red Hat is adding its say to the Bilski patent case, filing a brief with the U.S. Supreme Court emphasizing practical problems with software patents.

Red Hat argues that the patent system is supposed to foster innovation, but in software it does the opposite, slowing and discouraging innovation. Software products may involve thousands of patentable components, leaving developers to risk defending costly patent infringement claims.

Groklaw has the brief as plain text.

They stand alone alone so far among vendors, willing to stand up and express what the FOSS community would really say if it could speak with one voice to the Supreme Court. This is certainly what *I* would say if I had that chance. And so I am satisfied. I was going down the depressing list of briefs filed for Petitioner on the ABA’s list of filed amicus briefs, and it was so frustrating to see no one saying anything like what I believe to be technically true about software patents or addressing the specific needs of Free and Open Source software. At last someone has told them what we wanted to say. I just hope the Supreme Court has some techies in the clerk pool!

SJVN is very supportive of Red Hat’s action.

What do Microsoft, Red Hat, and Canonical all have in common? They all dislike software patents. Don’t get me wrong. Many companies that are anti-patent also hold and use patents against their enemies. Microsoft is one of those. But, if you get an in-house corporate IP (intellectual property) lawyer from any company in a bar, he or she will tell you that software patents are awful. So, I’m pleased to report that Red Hat, has filed an amicus curiae brief with SCOTUS (Supreme Court of the United States) asking the Court to adopt the Bilski case ruling and explictly extend it so that software can’t be patented.

Jason from the Mono-Nono Web site brings attention to the following:

Oh and one section in all caps “AN ABSTRACT IDEA DOES NOT BECOME PATENTABLE MERELY BY IMPLEMENTING IT IN COMPUTER SOFTWARE”.

A further note of interest is the references Red Hat draws upon, including thinkers such as Donald Knuth and Richard M. Stallman.

For a laugh, one might like to contrast the vital effort Red Hat is making here attempting to correct what is almost universally recognized as a broken patent system hindering software innovation and personal freedom with Novell’s press release today, “Got Mono?” where Novell takes another opportunity to hawk Mono and .NET.

The next post will deal with this latest Mono promotion from Novell.

FSF

The Free Software Foundation filed a brief, which is available as text too.

The Free Software Foundation (FSF) today submitted an amicus curiae brief calling on the Supreme Court to affirm that software ideas are not patentable. After outlining the positive impact that the free software movement and the GNU General Public License (GNU GPL) have had on computer use, the brief explains how software patents are an obstacle and a danger to software developers.

SFLC

Even the Software Freedom Law Center submitted a brief, which is further analysed and discussed at Groklaw.

The Software Freedom Law Center has now filed its brief in Bilski. You can read it online here, as well as download it as a PDF or as Postscript. It raises three major points: 1) software is just algorithms for computers in human readable terms, and algorithms are not patentable; 2) excluding software from patentable subject matter encourages innovation in software; and 3) the First Amendment prohibits permitting the patenting of abstract ideas. I think you’ll find that last point the most interesting.

It is worth remembering that IBM is not on the good side. █

Permalink 4 Comments      Send this to a friend

Nigeria Outsources Its Education to Microsoft

Posted in Africa, America, GNU/Linux, Google, Microsoft, Windows at 5:21 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Summary: 10,000 secondary schools in Nigeria to receive ICT indoctrination from Microsoft

WE HAVE SEEN many recent reports coming from Nigeria where Microsoft turns students into “Windows people” early in their lives [1, 2]. It does not even take Microsoft bribery in Nigeria in order to achieve; it’s part of the same old digital colonisation of Africa (Asia and South America also).

Here is the latest example where Microsoft takes over Nigerian education.

GOVERNOR Peter Obi of Anambra State has signed an agreement with Microsoft and New Horizons to train over 10, 000 secondary school students on Information and Communication Technology (ICT) in the state.

From previous reports we’ve learned that Microsoft teaches Nigerian people to recycle old computers using Windows, not GNU/Linux. This is usually marketed as “goodwill” rather than a case of Microsoft protecting its revenue streams and suppressing Free(dom) software. To be fair, not only Microsoft pulls this class of tricks and Bill Gates' investment in Nigerian oil, for example, actually kills many innocent children.

Nigeria should know better. Letting Microsoft people have a say on policy leads to irrational migrations without permission. Meanwhile we find that Google is employing people with a background in/at Microsoft.

Google isn’t opposed to hiring a Microsoft Most Valued Professional. But that doesn’t mean he can keep his Redmond-happy title.

Google should be careful not to employ people whose agenda is with the company that wants to “kill” Google. This is an HR mistake which ultimately leads Google to spreading ActiveX and DirectX, for instance. █

Permalink A Single Comment      Send this to a friend

The Continued Effect of Microsoft Antitrust Violations

Posted in America, Antitrust, Asia, Finance, Fraud at 4:49 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Summary: Citizens are urged to claim compensation from Microsoft; federal Web sites still reject non-Microsoft Web browsers

MICROSOFT’S settlement in Mississippi is a subject that we wrote about in [1, 2]. There’s more news on the subject as a deadline approaches and we know from experience that Microsoft relies on people being too apathetic (or insufficiently informed) to make appropriate claims. This way, Microsoft keeps the ‘crime money’ in the bank.

Mississippi residents have until Oct. 16 to submit claims under the state’s settlement of a lawsuit with Microsoft.

The state received $40 million from the settlement, and another $60 million was set aside for people, schools and businesses to make claims.

[...]

To receive vouchers, people must have purchased certain licensed Microsoft software, or a personal computer with certain Microsoft software installed on it, for use in Mississippi between January 1, 1996 and June 11, 2009. Hood says many schools and small businesses may also be eligible.

Claim forms are available at http://www.agjimhood.com.

The site uses PDF as its preferred format and Pamela Jones at Groklaw complains that a government Web site is still “Asking for IE or *Netscape*.” Several days ago she wrote: “I was looking for information on the H1N1 flu vaccination, to try to decide whether or not to get the shot or take my chances. There is some unknowable, so far, risk of adverse responses, as usual, and so the CDC and FDA have set up a site where you can report any such reactions, so they can track it. It’s called VAERS, or the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System. You can fill in the form online. But believe it or not, they suggest Internet Explorer or Netscape. If you recall, the exact same problem came up when we were invited to a conference on technology. Folks, please, seriously, update that page that so that Firefox is included, at least, so people using operating systems other than Microsoft Windows can easily access and report. Who uses Netscape? This is important. We’re talking about people’s lives. Thank you.”

This is what one gets when Microsoft commits crime to drive browser competition out of business. One of the people who were on this case at the time is now being interviewed by Mercury News and a similar issue crops up in India:

US Visa application not possible if you use free software!

I wanted to go to the international conference on semantic web to be held in October 2009 near Washington. So I try to apply for US visa. There seems to be no way for a person to apply for US visa without using MS Internet Explorer. Firefox/Mozilla based browsers don’t work. In protest to this unfair practice, I have written the following open letter to the Ambassador of United States in India.

It’s amazing, isn’t it? Are we back in the 1990s?

It is worth remembering that US visas are Microsoft's turf, which is only typical in a system of big egos and hot air.

Global CIO: Ballmer Blasts IBM For All The Wrong Reasons

If Steve Ballmer really believes his comments that IBM has short-changed its shareholders by selling off low-margin hardware businesses, and that IBM’s product line is more “narrow” now than ever before, then Ballmer’s strategy as laid out in his “New Efficiency” letter this morning makes absolutely no sense.

As a side note, Microsoft issued this unusual press release maybe in order to defend and promote its increasing proximity to the banking sector (the Citibank relationship gets tighter). It earns some free publicity for Microsoft which actually paid for it, passing it as “public service” and meanwhile at the SEC Microsoft is mentioned in a fraud case.

U.S. securities regulators charged virtual reality company 3001 AD on Tuesday with bilking $20 million from investors by fabricating plans for an initial public offering and falsely claiming support from tech giants Microsoft Corp (MSFT.O) and Apple Inc (AAPL.O).

Microsoft had its own share of fraud investigations with the SEC [1, 2]. █

Permalink Comments off      Send this to a friend