What is Digg?Sponsored by HTC
You and You and You. view!
youtube.com - You don't need to get a phone. You need a phone that gets you.
56 Comments
- bestadvocate, on 10/12/2007, -2/+16Bruce Perens is right, this has all the makings of "a protection racket", Novell could simply let Microsoft sue them, then wait for the companies to flock to them for "legal Linux" almost the exact same thing SCO tried to do.. Only this time if Microsoft sues them, they can pretend to be hapless bystanders, rather than calculative, unethical, opportunists they are. I also like how the article points out the brightest light at the end of this tunnel: the GPL3. Making Novell ether break that portion of the deal or take up supporting development cost of forked GPL2 software. And even then who in the Linux community is going to want to deal with software as basic as GGC thats been forked? Compiling software can be a trial as is.
- arbiterxero, on 10/12/2007, -1/+13Ack, I can't remember his name, but big-name Samba guy that worked for Novell, quit over it. HE has the real story, and you bet this is a protection racket...
MSFT keeps threatening their patents (since they hold the patent for CIFS, Fat32 and Double clicking) but they can't.
IBM has twice the patents they do... it's like nukes, if everybody has them, nobody can fire them due to mutually assured destruction. - schestowitz, on 10/12/2007, -6/+17Novell probably entered this deal because some top execs got incentives. There are some stock options which suggest it may have been the case. They sold out the company. Perens is one among the few who have guts to criticise the deal and his status helps a lot.
- Oktober, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9AFAIK, the FAT32 patent just lost out to the "obviousness" test in the EU, but it's been ruled valid over and over here in the US.
- geronimo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8This sort of attack on the GPL also doesn't "identify a single patent" to use your words. What does that tell you? It tells you this deal is about uncertainty(who knows which patents are covered), fear(if you don't use suse you may be liable to lawsuits) and doubt (Gee, maybe linux is unsafe). FUD. For whatever reason this was clear to me as soon as this deal was announced. Suse was losing money for Novel, Microsoft dangled some cash and voila, everyone benefits, well almost everyone. The developers who remain optimistic about interoperating with Microsoft products must realize that the proof is in the pudding. Microsoft has a lot of history to overcome before we can say they're serious about making linux and windows more compatible. As it stands, Microsoft is using this deal to hint that Linux is unsafe. They of course won't say it outright so people like you will ask what the problem is, which is why FUD is so effective. It can't be denied, it can only be put into the public meme.
- batasrki, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7While you are right, the point of the bitching is that Novell has kept the public in the dark when it came to the compromise. You don't make a deal with Microsoft that's only good for you. You must be prepared to give up something. And if Novell is purporting itself as a Linux-friendly company and this deal is about Linux, people will be paranoid. Especially, if that deal is with Microsoft, a company whose executives have openly bashed Linux, called it un-American and stopped just short of calling anyone who uses it a terrorist, traitor to America, etc. Now, if you were invested in the technology that someone else may have pawned off to a company known for, and legally convicted of, monopoly who won't stop at nothing, wouldn't you be just a little paranoid? And if you ask a legitimate question of the company who made the deal, and the company executive tells you that he can't discuss the deal "but, trust me, it's good for you", would you trust him/her?
I wouldn't - superm401, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7Hopefully, GPLv3 will make the patent deal illegal. That would mean one of:
a. Novell stops distributing GNU, Samba, and eventually a whole bunch of other software. This would be devastating.
b. Novell forks all that software from the last GPLv2 version, possibly with external help. This would be very difficult, since most of the existing developers would stay with their current projects.
c. Novell makes Microsoft license the patents to all GNU/Linux users. This is the ideal solution, but is highly unlikely.
d. Novell makes Microsoft quietly cancel the exclusive patent license. This is the most likely result. - Skeithy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Well you can't blame people for paranoid, Microsoft does not have a good track record with these things. If it turns out to benefit free software then that is great, but I'll remain skeptical. The surge in interest in free software has pushed some honesty out of microsoft, I hope it stays this way.
- MonkeyMCSE, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6@arbiterxero
that would be Jeremy Allison. He did it because he didn't believe in the pact between the 2 companies. I agree with him whole heartedly. - GMorgan, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6MS lost appeals into double figures on revoking their patent on FAT32 but there were always technicalities and in the end a judge ruled in their favour simply to end the raft of appeals. MS make so much from royalties on the FAT that it would have made sound business sense to continue the legal fight forever and the system makes it nearly impossible to avoid technicalities.
The system is set up to protect big business from competition, what do you expect out of it in the end. - encryptz, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5You can find more writeups here:
http://www.pthree.org/2007/03/19/bruce-perens-rains-on-the-novell-brainshare-parade/
http://jfindlay.us/blog/archives/2007/03/#e2007-03-20T02_15_18.txt
Audio and pictures from the event here:
http://xmission.com/~introplay/brainshare/ - MonkeyMCSE, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6bah, too late, here's an article about Allison's reasons and a link in the article to his resignation on groklaw
http://blogs.zdnet.com/microsoft/?p=169 - DavidDigg, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5The new GPL3 language would make all "immunity from lawsuit over patent" guarantees universal - in other words if company A gives up the right to sue company B over a patent violation in a piece of open source software then company A gives up the right to sue anyone over a patent violation in a piece of open source software.
That's the idea...the details are clearly quite involved. You have to realize that Stallman has a very difficult job: to protect the little guys in a hostile world. US patent law is quite strange and badly in need of rehabilitation, but our leaders are no help because too many of them worship at the altar of the free market.
"You can't prevent a company from doing business" according to your logic, detaining political prisoners would just be "government doing its business" - harry8227, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Again it wont happen but the best way to take care of this is dont buy or use anything from Novel. It would put a screeching halt on them, but just like RIAA , MPA and such you cant convince enough people to take the appropriate action to make much of a difference.
- wedesoft, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3> Instead of ATTACKING the creators and supporters of free software ... why don't you go directly to them with your questions? Ask Novell what their position on free software is.
In the webcast from the original press-conference hosted by Microsoft and Novell, it's all "patents, patents, patents, ...". Microsoft even brought some lawyer to make a long speech about intellectual property. This press conference does not leave open many questions about Novell's position on free software.
http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/press/2006/nov06/11-02MSNovellPR.mspx - GMorgan, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4No FAT32 is obvious. That's why it is bad. It is extremely simple.
- generalloy, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4"Interoperability"....what a nice smokeshield for "patents only applying to Novell customers in a loophole from the GPL2/royalties to MS for Linux". Get back to me when Novell can use Samba4 (CIFS, LDAP, Active Directory, domains) under this deal. Cuz the way it is now, they're not going to be able to and your precious interoperability will be shown as the myth it is :)
Jeremy Allison and several others who developed Samba quit Novell BTW. - baalzebub, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4fsck novell, i don't want them distributing Linux anymore, i hope they crash & burn...
- generalloy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Guess what?
The GPL already allows you to protect work with patents and provide indemnification. It just has to apply to EVERYONE WHO DISTRIBUTES. Novell got around this by making it apply only to their customers. Oh yeah, they also pay royalties to Microsoft for work they didn't do; did you think Novell actually funds most of the work done in Linux?
From the GPL preamble:
"Finally, any free program is threatened constantly by software patents. We wish to avoid the danger that redistributors of a free program will individually obtain patent licenses, in effect making the program proprietary. To prevent this, we have made it clear that any patent must be licensed for everyone's free use or not licensed at all."
Do you think Novell's doing this? Nope. MS-Novell's goal is to balkanize free software so that only Novell can be used commercially unless people pay royalties to MS.
Novell found a loophole and soon they'll be hurting, the GPLv3 is coming... - baalzebub, on 10/12/2007, -5/+8since novel is in bed with microsoft, it could be possible novell could slip some microsoft code in just to help microsoft with the claim that there is microsoft IP in Linux, wake up already...
- BullTaco, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3>Perens lives in a dream world where patents do not exist. While this is certainly a desirable goal.......
I am thrilled to have your valuable conclusory insight to contribute to society's understanding on this matter:
http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&lr=&q=+patent+innovation - GMorgan, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3SUSE wasn't losing money. According to their recent figures Novells profit margin has slashed but SUSE was an earner and it's revenue had almost doubled from the previous year. Obviously there is still not enough data to see the result of the MS deal.
- GMorgan, on 10/12/2007, -3/+5Code isn't relevant as patents. We could easily recode anything. It would be hard to slip in enough that it would be done both by stealth and stand up in a court of law.
- GMorgan, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4SUSE leap frogged Ubuntu for a few weeks on Distro watch when this first came out. First time Ubuntu has been off the top in over a year.
- generalloy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2So does anyone else find it funny that Samba4 (the key role of MS-Linux interoperability) will be distributed under the GPLv3, barring Novell from distributing it? Nevermind the GNU toolchain.
What was that about this deal being about interoperability again? - Urusai, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4FAT32 isn't obvious...other than being obviously bad and simplistic. A more obvious method would use Data Structures 101 linked-list type stuff. A monolithic, large, and static-sized array of allocation pointers reeks of late '70s 8-bit/64KB hackery. In particular, jamming long file names into volume ID entries is brilliantly stupid. You could put ALL your metadata in there!
- arbulus, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1edit:
Especiall when you see Novell come out with comments like "Windows is actually cheaper to run than Linux." It shows exactly where this is headed if MS has their way: the end of Novell and Suse Linux as it stands now. - wedesoft, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1It is a win-win-situation for Microsoft:
Either it wins a Linux-distributor as partner for enforcing patent licensing fees without paying the people who are actually developing the software, or it manages to rid one of the best distributions of its supporting community. - GreatDrok, on 10/12/2007, -4/+5Patents? On CIFS, Fat32 and double clicking?
CIFS - existed before MS grabbed it.
Fat32 - fails the obviousness test so should never have been patented and wouldn't hold up in court
Double clicking - Apple was doing this before MS
MS can threaten all they like. The reality is, Novell was suing them and this deal was the payoff. Novell got more money out of this than MS did so why is MS shouting so much? There is much more to this than patents. - arbulus, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Why would you trust a "partnership" between Microsoft and a company that produces a Linux distro? Steve Balmer was pretty clear on his feelings toward the open source community and Linux in general. We're all theives in his mind. So what reason would they have to enter into a partnership with that very thing? Perhaps to suck it up, buy it, and put it out of business, and in the meantime, sue countless other people and companies for IP violations and effectively kill the open source community? I can't see it for anything BUT that.
- BullTaco, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1>The new GPL3 language would make all "immunity from lawsuit over patent" guarantees universal - in other words if company A gives up the right to sue company B over a patent violation in a piece of open source software then company A gives up the right to sue anyone over a patent violation in a piece of open source software.
Huh?
Company A has no relationship to the GPL whatsoever and thus can enter into any licensing deal at will. Wording in the GPL can not accomplish what you are stating no matter how clever you deem a certain individual to be.
>That's the idea...the details are clearly quite involved. You have to realize that Stallman has a very difficult job: to protect the little guys in a hostile world. US patent law is quite strange and badly in need of rehabilitation, but our leaders are no help because too many of them worship at the altar of the free market.
No you see, this is the idea for those having a little difficulty with the concepts:
An unfettered market free of corruption (corruption: see China, Russia and in some respects, India) with capable intellectual property laws (weak IP laws: see Russia and China) is what protects the little guy.
The US patent law is quite strange and badly in need of rehabilitation but it is better than most (the same can be said for our legal, educational, political, and medical care systems). - unsigned1138, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1generalloy: Exactly those things are in Novell's Open Enterprise Server 2. They demoed them at the Brainshare keynote on Monday.
- geronimo, on 10/12/2007, -4/+5I am glad most people are seeing this deal for what it is. Next question.. People still use Suse?
- zolushkatykva, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Nice indeed. Are you people blind to vote for THIS?
- kwimia, on 10/11/2007, -0/+0Very strange. Seems to be vain for me...
- divabox, on 10/11/2007, -0/+0Splendid! Wow, these are cool!
- unsigned1138, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Well yeah, I'd guess it is. But the market is to current Novell customers so they are already paying per user. The same would apply for something from MS, or IBM or Redhat.
- shanesemler, on 10/12/2007, -7/+7I think the FSF is hysterical. And trying to change GPL3 to "prevent such deals" is absurd. You can't prevent a company from doing business and the GPL shouldn't have any such language. That's not it's purpose.
- generalloy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0is it proprietary? Do you have to pay per client, how many connections are you allowed, etc..
Samba has some perks being GPL'd... - evilTak, on 10/12/2007, -4/+4You can't prevent a company from breaking a legal contract it entered into with you?
Well, I guess this *is* a Microsoft deal... - heathenx, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1dear bruce,
just because you have a tiny penis does not mean you should take it out on novell...of course, on the other hand...i'd be pissed too...nevermind. - BullTaco, on 10/12/2007, -3/+2>Novell probably entered this deal because some top execs got incentives. There are some stock options which suggest it may have been the case. They sold out the company.
>Perens is one among the few who have guts to criticise the deal and his status helps a lot.
So does your unsubstantiated claim. Care to point to any SEC filings that back up your accusations? - Wootery, on 10/12/2007, -5/+4"and remove all packages & source code that came from novell/SuSE"
If it's released under GPL, I don't imagine it to be dangerous to use the code.
It's not worth harming your distro to spite Novell. - harry8227, on 10/12/2007, -5/+4Geroninmo...you stated people use SUSE, SUSE is Novel, dont use it use UBUNTU or some other Linux Product, Dont use NOVEL
- BullTaco, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0---
- unsigned1138, on 10/12/2007, -9/+7As I sit here at Brainshare and read the comments, I see a bunch of people commenting that don't work with these products in a business enviroment. No matter what the reasoning behind the deal was, thefact is that greater interoperability between Linux and Windows is activly being worked on by the two companies.
The hardware companies have stated there is room for two (2, 00000010, etc) OS's, Windows and Linux. They aren't going to support every flavor of Linux, its gonna be a select few and Novell is aiming to be one of those. This goes far beyond your linux powered toaster, this is about large enterprise.
All you slashdot reading, basement dwelling linux goofs have finally gotten your wish and are doing nothing but bitching about it. You are getting active professional contribution to linux and its not good enough. I just don't get it. - heathenx, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1@theendlessnow
well put brother! - baalzebub, on 10/12/2007, -7/+5i knew this deal between microsoft and novell had the devil in the works from the very beginning, something stinks in Redmond and it is not the fish...
i also hope all other Linux distributions cut ties with novell and remove all packages & source code that came from novell/SuSE, OpenSuse better do a code audit too... - panique, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1Bruce who?
- rek2, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1Well done Bruce!!! keep up the spirit that many seen to have forgotten..
http://www.binaryfreedom.info
Free as in Freedom -
Show 51 - 56 of 56 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is