| |||||||||||||
Naughton's Microsoft bona fidesNaughton's Microsoft bona fidesPosted Aug 15, 2011 23:20 UTC (Mon) by kmself (subscriber, #11565)Parent article: Android and the GPLv2 death penalty
Since it's been mentioned previously, and Naughton's present professional bio doesn't include this information, it's at the very least interesting to note that he has worked extensively with Microsoft in the past. Criticisms of Naughton's work by Bradley Kuhn of the FSF and others would suggest his legal analysis isn't taken as credible by persons with significant interest and experience in Free Software and GPL matters. Edward J. Naughton, Professional Biography, Internet Archive as of June 22, 2008. Co-counsel defending Microsoft against a putative consumer class action alleging that it had violated wiretapping statutes and common law privacy rights by designing Windows to permit third parties to place cookies on computers. Obtained dismissal of complaint.(This would appear to be the "Fortune 50 software company" referenced in his current bio).
(Log in to post comments)
Naughton's Microsoft bona fides Posted Aug 16, 2011 10:19 UTC (Tue) by jospoortvliet (subscriber, #33164) [Link]
I do doubt that the fact he worked for MS has very much to do with all this (although talking to MS ppl might have changed his opinions on things and the like).
Ok, I don't know, but it's not really needed to explain his behavior and as such I simply go for the simplest explanation: he just wants attention. Which works exceptionally well. Realize that this is typical FUD: only those who know what they are talking about (the average LWN reader, for example) know it's bullshit but 90% of the readers of his blog will probably take it as an insightful article by a good and clearly smart lawyer ("let's hire him to defend us/check our legal situation/etc").
Frankly those who think MS is behind this (same as with SCO) imho greatly over-estimate the intelligence of large corporations. This is too cunning a plan to come out of a bureaucratic entity as big as MS.
Naughton's Microsoft bona fides Posted Aug 16, 2011 11:32 UTC (Tue) by danieldk (guest, #27876) [Link]
It is not uncommon for proprietary software vendors put forward such arguments in bids to scare parties that would consider a GPL-licensed alternative.
For instance, in 2006, Wasabi Systems argues that GPL Violations are Sarbanes-Oxley violations to discredit GPL-ed competition of their storage systems:
http://www.wasabisystems.com/pdf/GPLSarbanesOxley_Wasabi.pdf
I am not saying that Microsoft instructed him to spread fear, but it is possible that he picked this up in Microsoft channels.
Since this FUD is probably used a lot, it is important that it is shown to be theoretical or false. If it is true, the situation is best remedied.
Naughton's Microsoft bona fides Posted Aug 16, 2011 18:50 UTC (Tue) by kmself (subscriber, #11565) [Link]
It might be connected, it might not.
Microsoft have certainly spread anti-GPL FUD for years, and this would be highly consistent with their previous behavior.
They've also worked at arms-length through astroturf campaigns, lobbying groups, and various companies (the Alexis de Toqueville Institute and Wang v. Netscape come to mind). Multiple times.
And the key personnel at Microsoft then and now remain.
I see it as an institutional disease, and view them with extreme skepticism and prejudice.
Of course, he could just be an attention-whoring, not-too-bright attorney.
But I repeat myself.
|
|||||||||||||