Industry


Ads by TechWords

See your link here


IT Blogwatch's picture
IT Blogwatch

A Daily Digest of IT Blogs from Richi Jennings

Novell to Ballmer: No patent problems here (and stupid CIO)

It's IT Blogwatch, in which Novell CEO Ron Hovsepian writes an open letter explaining last week's "unusual" Microsoft tie-up. Not to mention a broken business model "saved" by the last dot-com bubble bursting ...

Eric Lai explains:

Novell Inc. on Monday distanced itself from comments last week by Microsoft Corp. CEO Steve Ballmer that the Linux operating system infringes on Microsoft patents, although the two companies said that their recently-unveiled alliance remains intact ... A once-bitter rival of Microsoft and the distributor of SUSE Linux, which competes with Windows, Novell signed an agreement with Microsoft on Nov. 2 in which both companies pledged to make their software work together better, help each other with sales and marketing and protect their corporate customers against possible patent lawsuits. Microsoft also released a statement, saying that it "respects Novell's point of view on the patent issue, even while we respectfully take a different view."
...
In a question-and-answer session at a database conference in Seattle on Thursday, Ballmer openly asserted that "Linux uses our intellectual property" and users of the open-source operating system face "an undisclosed balance-sheet liability" as a result.

Matt Asay adds:

I assume [the statements are] geared toward all those who felt a bit cheated by the November Patent Surprise ... Novell's message is earnest, if a bit laughable at times ... As for Microsoft's message, it was FUD-as-usual
...

Just what does anyone get from this covenant not to sue? Not much. The same customers who run SUSE Linux also run Red Hat, Ubuntu, Debian, etc. Of course, it's these same customers that will drop-kick Microsoft the minute it starts to sue the planet, just as the world shelved SCO when it started suing customers. So, please, Microsoft, the very best thing you could do for Linux and open source is to start asserting your "rights." I can't wait. I respect that Novell means well by this agreement. It hasn't done well, but it means well. Microsoft? Not so much.

Pamela Jones groks 'em both:

[Novell] should not have signed an agreement called a patent cooperation agreement that gives Microsoft the opportunity to say the things Mr. Ballmer has been saying. I believe that is obvious now. He didn't even wait until the ink was dry. And you should have considered the GPL, its importance to the community, and considered what paying royalties means in that context. And we hope you will fix this.
...
What in the world was this deal about then? It seems at this point that it was Microsoft angling for a FUD opportunity. In any case, the deal is falling apart, I'd say. Microsoft's statement alleges that they don't have to agree to go forward. But if the parties themselves don't know what they agreed to or what the words mean, how valid is the contract? A contract does require a meeting of the minds [so] there's your out, Novell. There obviously was no meeting of the minds. Without a meeting of the minds, there are no obligations. At least that's what they taught me in my class on contract law.
...
If the world wants GNU/Linux to survive ... it will have to make some changes to the US patent system, some fundamental changes, or all you'll have is things like Vista and Zune. Read their EULAs, then read the GPL, and then think it over. What kind of world do you really want?

Baron's's Eric Savitz shows us the money:

In a post this morning, I noted that Credit Suisse has reduced its rating on Novell [so] I don’t think the letter solved that problem.

Taran Rampersad:

It seems Steve Ballmer was simply testing the waters when he was talking about Linux having Microsoft's proprietary information in it, or perhaps the buzzwords falling out of his mouth came out in an order that was completely unexpected. While there may be patting of backs, the question of why he would run off at the mouth is of interest. Perhaps they were trying to slide something past Novell.

In an imaginary counterstatement by a fictional person, someone accused Microsoft of having Linux code in Windows Vista. Of course, that's complete fiction - because if Microsoft used Linux code... who would know?

John Sinteur:

When you sleep with dogs, you get fleas. And if you don’t think you’re in any patent trouble, there was no need at all to sign the agreement. Even Microsoft agrees ... So, Novell, call me back when you’ve un-signed the deal. Until that time, you will continue to feel the heat from the community. Heck, some say you’re even violating the GPL.

Kevin Murphy:

Novell’s obviously terrified that it’s pissing off the Linux community by jumping so eagerly into bed with Microsoft ... Microsoft is sticking to its guns, of course ... I can’t help but feel that Microsoft has done a total number on Novell. But at the same time I can’t believe Novell never saw this coming. Matt Aslett is correct. Somebody should sue somebody and get this sorted out, at least before 2010.

Joe Landman:

Either Novell’s lawyers and execs are clueless, they were played, or they failed to consider the potential interpretations and ramifications of the deal and how people would react. Including the party they made the deal with. Which means that their marketing group was really clueless ... Microsoft is executing tactics against its strategic aims of ridding the world of the scourge of FOSS OSes and applications. Its execs appear to be willing to make deals, not what the people who they make deals with them believe they mean, and then spin them any which way they see fit. And they do so at the expense of the “partner” they did “business” with.
...
So which of these two organizations do you feel comfortable doing business with?

Buffer overflow:

Around the Net

Around Computerworld

Previously in IT Blogwatch

And finally... Saved By The Burst

Richi Jennings is an independent technology and marketing consultant, specializing in email, blogging, Linux, and computer security. A 20 year, cross-functional IT veteran, he is also an analyst at Ferris Research. Contact Richi at blogwatch@richij.com. I hate spammers and spammers hate me.

What People Are Saying

Personally, as both a

Personally, as both a business user of Microsoft products and a personal user of Linux/Microsoft products I am glad to see Novell and Microsoft collaborating. As I see it the more Linux developers collaborate with Microsoft developers (and vice versa) the easier my life becomes as a techologist. Heck, we might even see some innovation occur between the two!

I read this interview, and

I read this interview, and just can't believe that Novell would be so naive. They had to know that this was MSFT's angle. It's clear that a company like Novell is beholden to shareholders and must have a hard time turning down so many hundreds of millions.

But the question is: does this one time payment--a short term gain--weigh larger than the NPV of an entire business based upon FLOSS software? Because this agreement and their core business are fundamentally incompatible.

As much as Novell claims that they aren't sure about what's coming in the GPLv3, Novell must understand by now that they will be left with old versions of software that they must maintain themselves, as they will no longer be able to continue to benefit from the hard work of the world of FLOSS developers for free.

Perhaps they did believe that they could both try to use FLOSS software, whose very value comes from the spirit of complete openness and freedom, and create special rights that only their customers could enjoy. But if so, someone could have asked THAT question during the interview. Because it's hard to imagine that they believed that this was going to work out for them, and what their thoughts were.

As for MSFT, we'll see if this is a great move or not. Their sales people had a few years of being able to decry that Linux had unspecified "Legal problems" based on the SCO lawsuit. With the value of that suit dropping to mere noise for the MSFT sales people, I believe that they are purchasing two things out of this: 1. They are able to again claim that there are unspecified legal problems with Linux, excepting Novell. 2. Novell is a small Linux distributor. If it became the major one, finally, MSFT could crush them like any other company that it has competed against. In that game, MSFT is quite secure.

Of course, MSFT has now acknowledged that Linux matters to them so much that they would pay such a large sum of money for a move like this. We'll see what they actually bought in the next 6 months. My prediction on NOVL is that this is the last large influx of money that it will ever have, because it will fade away to obscurity from here. Playing in the FLOSS world requires cooperation, which NOVL seems to have forgotten.

The original article was

The original article was corrected shortly after it was published. The quote above has now been updated to reflect the correction. Sorry we didn't get them both at the time. And thank you very much for your close reading!

This is the second time that

This is the second time that one of your articles has stated that Novell is the "creator of the SUSE Linux distribution that competes with Windows".

Novell had nothing to do with the creation of the SuSE Linux distribution; they simply bought the SuSE company. Creation is a far cry from purchasing. I didn't "create" the computer I'm typing on now, but by your standards, I could claim so.

The first time I saw this in a ComputerWorld article, I made my comment in private, and was told that the correction had been made. It would appear that your research and editing is no better today than it was then, so I'm voicing a public complaint here. Your statement demeans the work that the people that did create SuSE Linux provided.

Novell did not create SuSE Linux. Do Some Research!

"A once-bitter rival of

"A once-bitter rival of Microsoft and creator of the SUSE Linux distribution."
I don't think so! SUSE created Suse Linux.
Novel just bought it, like M$ has bought Novel.

Has anyone considered that

Has anyone considered that MS is playing a clever game of pretending that they have IP in Linux while actually taking the Linux source and modifying it for the next version of their OS, and by this whole charade, creating a proprietary version of Linux? This is a long-term game; they're not interested in suing anyone; they just want a great OS at no cost and one which they can sell forever and, most importantly, not make public the source they've touched ever, thus violating the GPL, but making it look like they have not. Confusing? That's exactly the point.