Microsoft Won't Sue Linux Users, Company Exec Says (InformationWeek) [LWN.net]

Microsoft Won't Sue Linux Users, Company Exec Says (InformationWeek)

Posted May 15, 2007 19:06 UTC (Tue) by hingo (guest, #14792)
In reply to: Microsoft Won't Sue Linux Users, Company Exec Says (InformationWeek) by dobrien
Parent article: Microsoft Won't Sue Linux Users, Company Exec Says (InformationWeek)

"Microsoft currently collects royalties from some companies that use Linux in their computing environments, Gutierrez said."

No, if you read this with the weasel-filters enabled, you realise that it means exactly what it says by a literal reading:
- Microsoft collects (patent) royalties from several companies
- Many of these companies use Linux (After all, who doesn't these days? Even Microsoft has dozens of Linux computers in a Lab dedicated for that purpose.)
- Nobody said the royalties are in any way connected to the use of Linux.

Of course, it is certainly probable that Microsoft has been making patent agreements with some kind of "this also covers use of MS IPR in Linux operating system" language inserted. To which the opposing sides lawyers would have thought "great, even Linux is covered and we didn't even ask for it".

to post comments

Microsoft Won't Sue Linux Users, Company Exec Says (InformationWeek)

Posted May 15, 2007 22:06 UTC (Tue) by ncm (guest, #165) [Link] (1 responses)

Applying the weasel filters again, we can interpret "It's not the only way in which the problem can be addressed". They are saying that with MS's unlimited market power, you can play along with whatever they come up with this time, or something even nastier will be along shortly. It's a restatement of "it would be a shame if something were to happen to it."

They won't be suing anybody. Instead, they'll be shaking down business partners, threatening them with loss of various commercial perks. Magazines will publish innocent accounts of such "agreements", under threat of lost ad revenue. Initially, the shakedowns might not involve any money, but just "agreements" that may then be used to frighten later entrants. Some companies will jump eagerly, hoping to be one of those initial cheap "agreements".

The only real solution will be to file suit first, in a jurisdiction of "our" choice, for business interference. Then discovery will yield the patents (or lack of same). Probably the FSF should warn companies against entering such agreements, under threat of shareholder lawsuit for misuse of corporate funds, when it turns out there was nothing really there.

Turning downsiting Microsoft into a global business

Posted May 15, 2007 22:37 UTC (Tue) by robilad (guest, #27163) [Link]

What needs to happen, and may happen as I've already heard about law firms looking for prospective clients, is turning downsizing Microsoft into a high risk, high profit global business for enterprising local software companies & legal firms, and potent investors.

Now that Microsoft has successfully stripped itself of allies, and revealed itself as a national security threat for many governments globally, never mind threatening to sue their core customers, I assume a lot of people in high places globally won't mind seeing that threat reduced significantly, and would invest resources in one way or another.

Add in a business model based extracting some of the huge pile of cash Microsoft sits on (60 billion dollars, I believe), and you have a way of fixing the Microsoft issue, and presumably fixing the US patent system, once the world is finished downsizing them. It should be pretty good business, as these days a single patent that gets through Microsoft's defenses can fetch more than a billion dollars for a significantly smaller investment.

It won't be pretty, for Microsoft, and I'm afraid they've just crossed the point of no return, where the self-interest of everyone else in the world is in diminishing the threat that they pose, while trying to be the first ones to get whatever tasty bit is left of the beached whale.

Think SCO, only on a global scale, and a lot faster.