Weekly Edition
Return to the Press page
| |||||||||||
Conference Report: FOSS Means Business, Belfast (Linux Journal)
Linux Journal has a
conference report from the FOSS Means Business Conference in Belfast.
"Framed by two large stained glass windows, an impressive church pipe
organ and an altar, Bruce Perens began his keynote by spreading his hands
wide and uttering the words, "Dearly beloved". After the laughter died
down, Perens joked further by comparing programmers to clergy, with
references to "oaths of poverty", "chastity" and "celibacy" thrown in for
good measure. Overall, Perens delivered an entertaining keynote, recounting
tales from his days at Pixar and his first experience with collaborative
software development across the Internet, apparently unbeknown to his Pixar
bosses."
(Log in to post comments)
Patent trouble Posted Mar 28, 2006 19:07 UTC (Tue) by felixfix (subscriber, #242) [Link] I may be naive, but altho I see patents as raising a big stink, Linux is too widespread for patents to stop it. Imagine the worst case, where some judge issues an injunction against Linux, I know not what for, but just pretend so. Can you imagine the uproar? Not just from IBM, RedHat, Novell, etc., but from businesses around the country suddenly told they have to stop using their curent software and buy expensive proprietary licenses and rewrite whatever of their own software needs rewriting for the different OS, and oh no, you can't use your old software during the transition, no you have to put your business on hold.
Or maybe not an injunction, but huge license fees owed by RedHat et al to, say, Microsoft.... I simply cannot imagine such a ruling staying in effect. The outrage and disruption would be too great, and Congress would be forced to step in, whether they wanted to or not, whether Microsoft and SCO wanted them to or not.
I see this as similar to encrypting the music from media to speaker. It would obsolete all prior equipment, forcing end users to buy a completely new system, and they would not be happy campers. It is too draconian to ever come to pass, no matter what kind of wet dreams Bill Gates and Darl McBride might have. It just won't happen.
Patent trouble Posted Mar 28, 2006 20:30 UTC (Tue) by pmas (guest, #36804) [Link] If "they" decide to attack, they don't have to ask for billions from IBM. They can ask for 10-100M from RedHat and OSDL. Or "they" may ask police to seize some developer's computers as a proof that developer broke law. MS has $50B in bank - it could buy a lot of lawsuits. How many FLOSS developers will be ready pay 50K-100K for attorney's services and risk jail sentence, refusing to settle out of courthouse? Remember Sklyarov (http://www.freesklyarov.org/) served jail sentence for programming something that was 100% legal in his home country. RIM (BlackBerry) paid like 500M to a patent troll just to be able to continue business.
Don't feel you are safe because "they" are after someone else. Let's hope Europe will resist software patents.
Patent trouble Posted Mar 28, 2006 20:50 UTC (Tue) by felixfix (subscriber, #242) [Link] OK, let's go with that. Suppose a couple of programmers go to jail for writing parts of Linux. Do you think the rest of the Linux world would just sit down and mumble in their oatmeal? There was a huge outcry over Adobe's persecution of Skylarov; do you remember how quickly they backpedaled, even tho the feds didn't drop the case? It will be a cold day in hell before Adobe pulls a stunt like that again. Now imagine it was someone mainline, like a kernel developer. Do you really think there would be no repercussions? I bet you'd have half the hitech companies bankrolling the best defense they could get, not to mention pissing all over Microsoft's own patent portfolio with theirs. Microsoft couldn't hire enough lawyers to fend off all the lawsuits.
Or suppose they want $$$ from RedHat. To what purpose? If they ask for too much, the company would go bankrupt, which would upset a lot of businesses, not to mention antitrust lawyers. Suppose they only ask for some small amount. RedHat would be fools to not get a general purpose license that would indemnify all of Linux, and there would be some interesting marketing there ... "Microsoft certifies Linux as not infringing any patents".
It's very simple. If Microsoft gets greedy, they will cause such an uproar that they will lose bigtime in the long term and will stir up a hornet's nest in the short term. There would be literally millions of developers looking for patent infringement by Microsoft, they would be DDoS'd to a faretheewell, and the antitrust people would come out by the gross to nail their ass. That $50B warchest they have would be a mighty tempting target. If Microsoft or SCO only ask for enough to be a nuisance, they would shoot their wad and only give Linux a new marketing slogan for their trouble.
Patents are a nuisance but not a problem. The longer Microsoft waits, the harder it gets, and they have long since passed the point where they could do something and get away with it.
Patent trouble Posted Mar 28, 2006 22:32 UTC (Tue) by lakeland (subscriber, #1157) [Link] Maybe you're right, but I'm not so optimistic. How many ordinary people know about Adobe's prosecution of (pardon spelling) Dimetry? A fair number of geeks don't know about it now!
Sure, there would be an uproar if say (picks name from hat) Diego Biurrun was sued, but then what? Will that save Diego's backside? Will the negative publicity really hurt Microsoft (assuming they do the suing through a puppet ala SCO)? Will the negative publicity stop other people contributing to linux?
The scenario you present (large, effective uproar) is a possibility, but it isn't the only possibility. All it would take to cripple desktop linux is a few carefully-chosen lawsuits that slow development in key areas until DRM-laden technologies from MS become entrenched.
If Linux is unable to play the next generation of movies, or if it cannot exchange documents with the new MS Word, it will lose the momentum it has gained on the desktop. Or what about embedded (graphical) linux such as in cellphones or PDAs? A couple carefully placed lawsuits say killing handwriting recognition, or preventing linux implementing voice2txt would likely lock out those markets too.
I don't think there is any doubt that linux is infringing on many MS patents. Yes, I know those patents _should_ never have been granted. They have been and Linux infringes on them. Fighting patent lawsuits is both risky and expensive. All it would take is one clueless judge and a large chunk of desktop linux would be destroyed.
I doubt even MS could kill linux on the server now, but look how much damage the almost bankrupt SCO was able to cause without owning a single patent. I simply cannot comprehend how much damage MS could cause if they were desperate enough to risk their reputation. Maybe the backlash would result in laws passed to legitamise linux and end software patents, maybe it would fall on deaf ears and linux would be locked into the server room. Personally, I'm not looking forward to finding out.
Patent trouble Posted Mar 29, 2006 1:09 UTC (Wed) by felixfix (subscriber, #242) [Link] Microsoft's patent portfolio is pretty small. If Linux is infringing any of their patents, I am sure Microsoft itself is infringing many more of IBM's patents. I expect IBM already has a list of hundreds or even thousands of such violations, and perhaps has even let Micorosoft know this.
Microsoft is a classic schoolyard bully. They can only pick on the weak, and as soon as they get out of the easy pickings from a schoolyard, they turn into whimpering cowards. Linux has too many friends and is too entrenched for Microsoft to pick on it.
The next generation codecs could be a problem. But there are a lot of small companies producing linux-based devices, and if Microsoft were to try anything anticompetitive, I think even the Bush antitrust regulators would be hard pressed to ignore events. The Europeans look pretty fed up with Micorsoft shenanigans, so do the Koreans, and I doubt the Chinese would like such strongarm tactics when they have come up with their own version of Linux, Red Flag. China is a huge market, and Microsoft needs new markets since it has no room to expand in the current markets. I don't think Microsoft wants to take the chance of being shut out of China.
SCO has not damaged Linux. When they first brought suit, there was a lot of excitement, but I remember thinking it ws just noise and would backfire as it has. I remember surveys taken once it became clear in the general press that the emperor may have had suits, but it had no clothes, and it looked like the publicity had actually legitimized Linux. And now that SCO has finally run out of discovery in their trial, IBM is using their turn to go after the ties between SCO and Microsoft. It looks to me like Microsoft is now on the defensive and has little opportunity for any further proactive trouble. They will never recover the initiative. Everyone knows about Microsoft's tactics of FUD now, not just a few geeks.
Look at how backfooted they have become over ODF. They have resorted to getting on a standards committee in the hopes of slowing it down. That's desperation, the kind of action that smacks of weakness, like a mob protection thug threatening to toilet paper your business. If they had any kind of patents, you'd think Office would be prime territory. Yet they resort to this! If they can't do any better than plant goofy stories in a Boston newspaper and make a martyr of Peter Quinn, we have nothing to fear. Either they have no clothes either, or they are terrified of wearing them.
Patent trouble Posted Mar 29, 2006 14:18 UTC (Wed) by pmas (guest, #36804) [Link] Maybe schoolyard bully, but with very good lawyers and marketoids. Don't forget Bill G. studied law in Harward, not compsci. Fortunately he did not graduated. :-)
I would not describe amount of MS patents as "pretty small" :-) I believe it is second after IBM. MS is safe from patent retaliation from any company which produces software except patent trolls. MS has enough patents crosslicensed with anybody.
Also, MS would not be fools to attack any GNU/Linux luminary. They don't have to decapitate free software movement (it is not possible), just hire disposable front companies (like SCO) to attack key projects to make participation prohibitively risky for companies (except big ones like IBM and Sun with own big patent portfolio).
We would hardly know about such patent racketeering - many companies would prefer settle out of court and not risk losing whole business.
Drugs Posted Mar 28, 2006 20:43 UTC (Tue) by AnswerGuy (subscriber, #1256) [Link] I think you over-estimate the political influence of a couple million users and one faction of one segment of the IT economic realm.
Think of it this way: there have been 10s of millions of people who have called for the decriminalization of marijuana for decades now ... and yet they are still criminal; and the feds still impose their will over the popular majorities in some states which have tried to legalize or decriminalize its use (even just for medicinal purposes).
In times past when there was not only draft registration but an active military draft program ... it was obviously unpopular in large segments of hte population. Too bad. It was done and could be again.
In light of these historical events I would think that something as relatively "insignificant" as "some little computer stuff" (that doesn't run on Windows anyway) ... I think that it will have rather less sway than you think.
It's not a matter of "would it be too unpopular or disruptive." It really is a question of law and whether our "representatives" continue to act as the paid shills of their multi-national masters or whether we can actually get them to REPRESENT us.
JimD
Business Posted Mar 28, 2006 21:14 UTC (Tue) by felixfix (subscriber, #242) [Link] Neither the draft nor drugs have anything to do with the economy, and business itself, in the form of alcohol and tobacco companies, was (and is) dead set against legalizing any kind of competition. If you tell even 1% of the businesses in the US to stop using their existing software, they will raise such a stink that St. Peter will have to hand out gas masks at the Pearly Gates. I bet 50% of businesses would be adversely affected by being told to stop using Linux, some more than others, and no one will ignore that.
The Wright brothers patented wing warping, which actually bent the thin wings then in use. Curtiss got around that by introducing ailerons, hinged sections of wing, that have been widespread ever since and are in fact necessary for any substantial wing. The patent battles went on for so long that eventually the US govt stepped in and either bought up the patents or knocked their heads together. The ostensible excuse was the the European war which we know of as WW I, which the US didn't enter until a year later.
I doubt the aviation market was even a hundredth as extensive back then as the Linux market is now.
You underestimate how widespread Linux is. The users who will stink out Congress are businesses, not people.
Patent trouble Posted Mar 29, 2006 5:00 UTC (Wed) by omez (subscriber, #6904) [Link] No measure is too draconian for Microsoft or its proxies. And there certainly is nothing to hinder the armies of potential patent trolls.
Observe that they are now trying to gain a more global, DMCA-like reach through the WTO.
I very much like the writer's Posted Mar 29, 2006 14:37 UTC (Wed) by Baylink (subscriber, #755) [Link] characterization of "Leaders and Saints".
It's rms' *job* to be hardline and obdurate. That doesn't mean that every member of the community should follow him in every detail, all the time. But those ideals have to be there, and they have to be somewhat strident and outlandish -- or they wouldn't *be* ideals.
That said, the Saints should not *be* the Leaders -- we can see the first stirrings of why in US politics right now -- and the Leaders need to be pragmatic, focussed on Getting Things Done while the Saints handle the longterm goals.
|
|||||||||||