Comments on: Novell Put Its Own Customers at Risk http://techrights.org/2007/05/14/novell-customer-risk/ Free Software Sentry – watching and reporting maneuvers of those threatened by software freedom Fri, 25 Nov 2016 09:41:40 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.9.14 By: Francis Giannaros http://techrights.org/2007/05/14/novell-customer-risk/comment-page-2/#comment-702 Wed, 16 May 2007 07:45:49 +0000 http://boycottnovell.com/2007/05/14/novell-customer-risk/#comment-702 Do you have a link? Couldn’t you provide the justification yourself?

Marti, is that some type of attempt at intimidation?

]]> By: Marti van Lin http://techrights.org/2007/05/14/novell-customer-risk/comment-page-2/#comment-701 Wed, 16 May 2007 02:38:07 +0000 http://boycottnovell.com/2007/05/14/novell-customer-risk/#comment-701 Ah yeah Roy, this must be that Francis we scribbled about in cola, right?

Smells a little fishy ;)

Keep up the good work!

]]> By: Roy Schestowitz http://techrights.org/2007/05/14/novell-customer-risk/comment-page-2/#comment-700 Tue, 15 May 2007 21:12:44 +0000 http://boycottnovell.com/2007/05/14/novell-customer-risk/#comment-700 Read Matt Aslett’s blog and then find the article which he eventually published. It made it all very clear and I stand by what I said.

]]> By: Francis Giannaros http://techrights.org/2007/05/14/novell-customer-risk/comment-page-1/#comment-698 Tue, 15 May 2007 15:44:58 +0000 http://boycottnovell.com/2007/05/14/novell-customer-risk/#comment-698 What? That is a completely separate issue (though one we can talk about if you like). You made the bold statement that Novell admitted that Linux infringes on Microsoft’s patents. I would like to see some real evidence for this statement. You persistently make it on the site and you don’t have a shred of evidence to back it up. If you do, by all means, present it.

The article you linked to talks about (i) agreement not to sue customers, and (ii) sanctioned access to Microsoft’s code for the interopability. Nothing there about admitting that Linux infringes on MS’s patents.

]]> By: Roy Schestowitz http://techrights.org/2007/05/14/novell-customer-risk/comment-page-1/#comment-696 Tue, 15 May 2007 11:11:56 +0000 http://boycottnovell.com/2007/05/14/novell-customer-risk/#comment-696 http://boycottnovell.com/2007/05/09/novell-says-ok-to-ip/

Novell’s PR confirms that Novell needs IP, contradicting previous appeasing statements

]]> By: Francis Giannaros http://techrights.org/2007/05/14/novell-customer-risk/comment-page-1/#comment-695 Tue, 15 May 2007 10:38:21 +0000 http://boycottnovell.com/2007/05/14/novell-customer-risk/#comment-695 > Novell has opened the floodgates to threats when it offered admission that Linux was ‘unclean’.

Oh come on, give it a rest. Curious that you have read all these extra Novell news sites and yet you failed to read their latest PR blog entry which explicitly states (while re-quoting the open letter):

”We disagree with the recent statements made by Microsoft on the topic of Linux and patents. Importantly, our agreement with Microsoft is in no way an acknowledgment that Linux infringes upon any Microsoft intellectual property. When we entered the patent cooperation agreement with Microsoft, Novell did not agree or admit that Linux or any other Novell offering violates Microsoft patents.”

It’s easy to make strong statements; not so easy to substantiate them.

]]> By: Roy Schestowitz http://techrights.org/2007/05/14/novell-customer-risk/comment-page-1/#comment-694 Tue, 15 May 2007 07:58:47 +0000 http://boycottnovell.com/2007/05/14/novell-customer-risk/#comment-694 Of course. :-) I neglected to indicate explicitly enough that this was a comical statement.

]]> By: Marcus Meissner http://techrights.org/2007/05/14/novell-customer-risk/comment-page-1/#comment-693 Tue, 15 May 2007 05:36:32 +0000 http://boycottnovell.com/2007/05/14/novell-customer-risk/#comment-693 Security and Assurance here is of course the technical thing.

Ciao, Marcus

]]>