4um: Microsoft: Linux Violates 235 of our Patents

Microsoft told Fortune magazine Linux violates 235 of its patents. While the claim is jaw-dropping, just as interesting is Fortune's take on how Microsoft got into the patent-protection racket in the first place. With the courts interpreting software's patent eligibility differently, Microsoft went gangbusters into filing for patents (as opposed to simply copyrighting its software) in the early years of this decade. The story also has a great primer on the Free Software Foundation, Open Source, the Torvalds-Stallman split, and the deal Microsoft signed with Novell that really began this fight. The gist of the story is that if the fight between MSFT and the the free software folks escalates, Redmond could end up suing corporate Linux users, many of whom are also Microsoft customers. But wait! Not to be outdone, Stallman's group is fighting fire with fire:

In free-software circles, though, the Microsoft-Novell entente was met with apoplectic rage. Novell's most eminent Linux developer quit in protest. Stallman, of course, denounced it. Not only did it make a mockery of free-software principles, but it threatened the community's common-defense strategy.
FOSS developers, who do not have the resources to defend themselves against a Microsoft patent suit, felt safe as long as powerful corporate Linux users shared their cause. But now the big boys could just buy their Linux from a royalty-paying vendor like Novell, getting protection from lawsuits and leaving the little guys to fend for themselves. What the shortsighted corporate types didn't grasp was that without the little-guy developers there might not be any high-quality FOSS for them to use five years down the road.
"We should talk," Stallman's attorney, Moglen, told Smith in a phone call a few days after the announcement. On Nov. 9, they met at the Software Freedom Law Center's tidy offices on Manhattan's Upper West Side. The Free Software Foundation was planning to prevent Microsoft from doing any more deals like the one it made with Novell, Moglen told Smith. It was drafting a new version of the GPL that would plug the loophole that Smith had just exploited.
Microsoft's big nightmare: free online apps
Moglen had another card to play. In his view, the fact that Microsoft was selling coupons that customers could trade in for Novell Linux subscriptions meant that Microsoft was now a Linux distributor. And that, as Moglen saw it, meant that Microsoft was itself subject to the terms of the GPL. So he'd write a clause saying, in effect, that if Microsoft continued to issue Novell Linux coupons after the revised GPL took effect, it would be waiving its right to bring patent suits not just against Novell customers, but against all Linux users. "I told Brad," he recalls, "'I think you should just walk away from the patent part of the deal now.'"
Smith didn't, and Moglen kept his promise. On March 28, the Free Software Foundation made public revised GPL provisions, which are expected to take effect in July.

This looks to be a big old fight that might not be settled anytime soon. It's going to be a hot summer.

Microsoft is getting desperate. Vista must not be selling as well as they claim.

God is always good!
"It was an interesting day." - President Bush, recalling 9/11 [White House, 1/5/02]

I don't know anyone who's migrated to Vista, and I certainly have no plans to do so.

No, it's a mistake. I was looking for the Linux ping list, but somehow that one popped up.

I wonder how many desk jockeys in the legal department spent the winter cooking this one up.

"When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall, one by one." Edmund Burke

Xerox invented the mouse, Apple invented the graphic user interface, Netscape invented the web browser and Unix was around long before MS-DOS, which MS, incidently initially bought and did not develop. Bell Labs, which made Unix has a lot more ground to stand on in making such a claim, and they couldn't press their case.

MS's life long strategy has been playing the licensing game, and they've done more copying themselves than innovations.

It's interesting that MS might be billed as a linux distributor, though. Makes it look like MS is being assimilated by linux.

Separately, MS insiders sold over 537,000,000.00 $$$ of stock in the last ten days.

"The penalty good men pay for indifference to public affairs is to be ruled by evil men" Plato

Article I, Section 8: To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries;

The patent might be vacated because "progress" was done by the public domain and released to the public domain. Patents are granted to promote *progress* and not for revenue purposes.

Further, since the patented idea is now in the public domain and Microsoft has not acted strongly to protect their rights (who do you sue?) the patent might be vacated on those grounds as well.

Gate's mother was a lawyer for IBM, and that is why "In 1980, IBM first approached Bill Gates and Microsoft..."

The part: "...QDOS was different enough from CP/M to be considered legal" is absurd to anyone familiar with both systems. This is offered up as the reason that Kindall didn't sue. Considered by whom? Something else was occuring here.

I must add that there was a C/PM version available for the IBM PC at about $60, whereas Gates offering was about $7.00, cost to IBM.

I was told 20-odd years ago that Kildall went flying and left his wife to meet with the IBM reps. I checked on Wiki and came up with this: