Get Ready to Pay Up, Red Hat Users

Microsoft Aims For Red Hat

vnunet wrote:

Microsoft chief executive Steve Ballmer has warned users of Red Hat Linux that they will have to pay Microsoft for its intellectual property.

"People who use Red Hat, at least with respect to our intellectual property, in a sense have an obligation to compensate us," Ballmer said last week at a company event in London discussing online services in the UK.

Wow! I wonder what is coming next?

I don't use Red Hat, but if I did, I'd call FUD on this one.

I rarely agree with the OpenSource Zealots, but in this case, Microsoft in general and Balmer in specific needs to put up or shut up.  This is FUD at it's worst.  If there's proof of violations, then reveal them.

wkempf wrote:

I rarely agree with the OpenSource Zealots, but in this case, Microsoft in general and Balmer in specific needs to put up or shut up.  This is FUD at it's worst.  If there's proof of violations, then reveal them.

Indeed.

Always worry about the state of a company when it decides to litigate rather than innovate. 

Ray6 wrote:



wkempf wrote: I rarely agree with the OpenSource Zealots, but in this case, Microsoft in general and Balmer in specific needs to put up or shut up.  This is FUD at it's worst.  If there's proof of violations, then reveal them.

Indeed.

Always worry about the state of a company when it decides to litigate rather than innovate. 

I can't go that far.  First, as far as I'm concerned, Microsoft is doing a lot of innovative stuff.  WPF is just one example.  Second, if someone is guilty, litigation is appropriate.  What's not appropriate is a multi-month FUD campaign where you make vague accusations with no concrete examples, much less evidence.

"Don't do business with them.  They broke the law."

"What law?"

"..."  (crickets chirping)

wkempf wrote:



Ray6 wrote:  wkempf wrote: I rarely agree with the OpenSource Zealots, but in this case, Microsoft in general and Balmer in specific needs to put up or shut up.  This is FUD at it's worst.  If there's proof of violations, then reveal them. Indeed. Always worry about the state of a company when it decides to litigate rather than innovate.

I can't go that far.  First, as far as I'm concerned, Microsoft is doing a lot of innovative stuff.  WPF is just one example.  Second, if someone is guilty, litigation is appropriate.  What's not appropriate is a multi-month FUD campaign where you make vague accusations with no concrete examples, much less evidence.

"Don't do business with them.  They broke the law."

"What law?"

"..."  (crickets chirping)

And the other day I read an old interview from 2000 with Anders here...and it was a pretty good discussion of how the CLR, C#, and various other things operated at that point...it was built from a mixture of innovative concepts, old techniques, and the rethinking of current ideas.

But I think we can all do without the vague accusations as you state. Then again...Halloween is just around the corner and maybe some more infamous "Halloween documents" are on the way. [6]

Oh would you guys just be quiet.  Microsoft has not litigated anything yet and if RH uses Microsoft IP illegally then sorry, RH and RH users need to pay up.  Just because Open Source is represented by an image of being good and being good for man does not allow them the right to STEAL.  Sorry, with Microsoft on this one

rjdohnert wrote:

Sorry, with Microsoft on this one

I'm with Microsoft on this one as soon as I know exactly what IP is being used. Innocent until proven guilty and all that.

rjdohnert wrote:

Oh would you guys just be quiet.  Microsoft has not litigated anything yet and if RH uses Microsoft IP illegally then sorry, RH and RH users need to pay up.  Just because Open Source is represented by an image of being good and being good for man does not allow them the right to STEAL.  Sorry, with Microsoft on this one

You miss the point.  Microsoft is spreading FUD.  They claim RH is using Microsoft IP illegally, but they don't say what IP.  They haven't litigated, all they've done is run a prolonged smear campaign with no actual facts.

If and when Microsoft releases information about what IP is infringing and/or litigates, then we can have a different discussion.  Things won't be cut and dried at first, mind you... SCO made the same sort of claims and couldn't prove anything, after all.  But I'll be much more likely to side with Microsoft then.  Until then, this is a bad PR campaign, and Microsoft/Balmer should be ashamed.

Umm... just a sec here.

1) FOSS probably does violate patents. Most software of any significant size violate patents. Why? Because there are so many patents that its nearly impossible to develop without infringing--especially when no patent information is explicitly released to the imposing party. It is completely unrealistic to expect developers to search thru millions of software patents before programming.

2) Why RedHat? There are only 500+ other Linux distributors to pick on. Oh and lets not forget BSD, Solaris, Minix, OS X, etc... all which support the same software in one form or another.

3) Microsoft doesn't wish to release the patent data because they know the FOSS community will attempt code around the patents and stand behind OIN for patents that cannot be worked around without significant loss of functionality.

wkempf wrote:

SCO made the same sort of claims and couldn't prove anything, after all.

SCO made claims of copyright infringement. Thats a bit different than patent violations, which are a far more more likely scenerio for any piece of software.

Xaero_Vincent wrote:



wkempf wrote: SCO made the same sort of claims and couldn't prove anything, after all.

SCO made claims of copyright infringement. Thats a bit different than patent violations, which are a far more more likely scenerio for any piece of software.

yeah keep in mind in Europe software patents aren't valid, they only work in good ol' usa, the baston of freedom and a governmental model for all nations

great country to be a lawyer, those are the real winners in a lawsuit

alastar wrote:

yeah keep in mind in Europe software patents aren't valid, they only work in good ol' usa, the baston of freedom and a governmental model for all nations

great country to be a lawyer, those are the real winners in a lawsuit

Lawyers are among the biggest things ruining our great country and for many reasons. But I will save this discussion for another forum.

alastar wrote:

yeah keep in mind in Europe software patents aren't valid

I am not sure that is true...

wkempf wrote:



You miss the point.  Microsoft is spreading FUD.  They claim RH is using Microsoft IP illegally, but they don't say what IP.  They haven't litigated, all they've done is run a prolonged smear campaign with no actual facts.

Although I am against the whole litigation thing, I think it is only fair to make one small point.

Since before it was released, the FOSS community has been engaged in exactly the same sort of FUD tactics against Microsoft.

Badvista.org
Picketing retail outlets and harassing the general public.
Backing 'scientific' claims from sources, who by their own admission, have not even installed Vista.

So, yes, I am concerned that this patent rubbish points to a company that may be in the early stages of a SCO-like future (however far off that may be), but all this 'poor me' whining from the FOSS community is a bit rich considering the campaign they have been running for the past five years.

Xaero_Vincent wrote:

Umm... just a sec here.

1) FOSS probably does violate patents. Most software of any significant size violate patents. Why? Because there are so many patents that its nearly impossible to develop without infringing--especially when no patent information is explicitly released to the imposing party. It is completely unrealistic to expect developers to search thru millions of software patents before programming.

"Probably" is not enough, IMO.  Besides, you're pointing out a severe flaw in the patent system here, which isn't doing Microsoft any favors in this case.

Xaero_Vincent wrote:

2) Why RedHat? There are only 500+ other Linux distributors to pick on. Oh and lets not forget BSD, Solaris, Minix, OS X, etc... all which support the same software in one form or another.

Very good question... and once again it doesn't do Microsoft any favors to have this pointed out.  It's just further evidence that they are resorting to dirty tactics in this case.

Xaero_Vincent wrote:

3) Microsoft doesn't wish to release the patent data because they know the FOSS community will attempt code around the patents and stand behind OIN for patents that cannot be worked around without significant loss of functionality.

That's even more damning, IMHO.  It means they aren't interested in protecting their IP, but are instead interested in profit through what amounts to extortion.  So if this hypothetical is true, you've just painted Microsoft in a much worse light than I was willing to do.

Again, this campaign is nasty, and Microsoft should put up or shut up immediately.  Rarely do I agree with the the Open Source folks, because I believe in capitalism and the rule of law, both which are counter to their utopian view points, IMHO.  But in this instance, Microsoft's behavior is something I find dispicable.

Ray6 wrote:



wkempf wrote:  You miss the point.  Microsoft is spreading FUD.  They claim RH is using Microsoft IP illegally, but they don't say what IP.  They haven't litigated, all they've done is run a prolonged smear campaign with no actual facts.

Although I am against the whole litigation thing, I think it is only fair to make one small point.

Since before it was released, the FOSS community has been engaged in exactly the same sort of FUD tactics against Microsoft.

Badvista.org
Picketing retail outlets and harassing the general public.
Backing 'scientific' claims from sources, who by their own admission, have not even installed Vista.

So, yes, I am concerned that this patent rubbish points to a company that may be in the early stages of a SCO-like future (however far off that may be), but all this 'poor me' whining from the FOSS community is a bit rich considering the campaign they have been running for the past five years.

And I criticize them just as much (probably more) for their actions as I'm criticizing Microsoft and Ballmer in this case.  But two wrongs do not make a right.  I'm not going to forgive Microsoft for this smear campaign just because they've been abused for years.