microsoft paid novell, not the other way around
microsoft paid novell, not the other way around
Posted Oct 13, 2007 20:52 UTC (Sat) by corbet (editor, #1)In reply to: microsoft paid novell, not the other way around by dlang
Parent article: Patent Infringement Lawsuit Filed Against Red Hat and Novell - Just Like Ballmer Predicted (Groklaw)
In other words, Novell is paying a per-unit charge to Microsoft. Which adds up to millions of dollars. Are you disagreeing with that, somehow?
Posted Oct 13, 2007 21:33 UTC (Sat)
by dlang (guest, #313)
[Link] (1 responses)
it may be that novell will sell enough copies of SuSE that the balance ends up being in microsoft's favor, possibly by millions, but that's not the case so far, and may never be the case, it all depends how many copies they sell.
but listing it as 'what else did novell pay microsoft millions for' is misleading at best.
Posted Oct 13, 2007 21:49 UTC (Sat)
by corbet (editor, #1)
[Link]
The balance of payments is completely irrelevant. Novell is paying a tax. I don't understand why the conversation always gets so slippery every time I ask what is being paid for.
Posted Oct 14, 2007 4:43 UTC (Sun)
by paulj (subscriber, #341)
[Link] (2 responses)
Or not?
Posted Oct 14, 2007 7:47 UTC (Sun)
by njs (subscriber, #40338)
[Link] (1 responses)
[1] http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/758004/00007580040...
Posted Oct 14, 2007 14:53 UTC (Sun)
by paulj (subscriber, #341)
[Link]
- The MS-like party are to spend money marketing Linux and Windows virtualisation /generally/
- The Novell-party should see a general increase in sales (to whatever extent) from such spending, beyond just those sales it sees in direct referrals from the Microsoft-like party.
That'd be the most reasonable explanation if it didn't involve MS..
microsoft paid novell $100+m, novell will pay microsoft a small per-copy fee.microsoft paid novell, not the other way around
Why is it misleading? What, exactly, is Novell paying for?
microsoft paid novell, not the other way around
Or Novell are giving Microsoft a kick-back on each copy of SuSe MS sell, i.e. a referall fee, paid for from the margins on the unit sold. Which wouldn't be an uncommon or sinister arrangement really.microsoft paid novell, not the other way around
Or not. Novell is apparently paying MS a percentage of *all* Suse revenues, including for copies that Novell sold all on their own and MS had nothing to do with -- at least as far as I can tell from the last line of their SEC filing[1], which is admittedly a bit vague.microsoft paid novell, not the other way around
If this agreement concerned any other two parties, ones not affected by contraversy and suspicion, most people'd conclude that if the Novell-like party were paying based on *all* their sales, that this was agreed because:microsoft paid novell, not the other way around