Just to confirm what we have preciated all along, here is a new article from BusinessWeek:

Nevertheless, Microsoft has pursued deals that incorporate similar legal principles. Among these are licensing deals Microsoft struck on Mar. 22 with Fuji Xerox, a joint venture between Fujifilm Holdings (FUJI) and Xerox (XRX); and on Apr. 18 with Samsung. Gutierrez says the arrangements resemble aspects of the Novell agreement. Those companies received licenses from Microsoft for technologies used in Linux and other open-source software contained in products they sell.

Novell cannot argue that its deal was benign. It can no longer pretend that its white flag has had no impact on Microsoft's future actions, which GPLv3 will put a stop to. Notice this Al Capone-like reference as well:

When it comes to compensating Microsoft for its intellectual property, discussion is less painful than litigation, according to Horatio Gutierrez, Microsoft's vice-president of intellectual property and licensing. "The alternatives to licensing are alternatives that aren't very attractive for anyone," he says.

In a different context, this would be equated to corporal threat. Is Microsoft truly willing to annoy some of its own customers, who use Linux at some level of capacity? As aggressive as Microsoft has become, the world seems somewhat apathetic. FUD will be FUD. Nothing more. We have learned our lesson from SCO.