Pay Microsoft to use free software

[Frank]

Microsoft takes on the free world

Microsoft claims that free software like Linux, which runs a big chunk of corporate America, violates 235 of its patents. It wants royalties from distributors and users. Users like you, maybe. Fortune's Roger Parloff reports.

So, it doesn't matter if you use OpenOffice instead of Microsoft Office, or Linux instead of Windows: you have to pay Microsoft anyway.

 

[Tim Murray]

Except they won't release the list of patents because one of two things will happen.

A. Open source community will rewrite the stuff to not infringe on the patents.
B. The patents will be challenged in court and found to be frivolous.

Instead, they'll just go to Large Company X and say, "You're using Linux. It infringes SO MANY PATENTS. Don't you want to buy liability protection from us?"

 

[nutball]

Well SCO don't seem to be having much success with this business model, then again MS can afford a lot more lawyer hours before they run out of money.

 

[Frank]

Except they won't release the list of patents because one of two things will happen.

A. Open source community will rewrite the stuff to not infringe on the patents.
B. The patents will be challenged in court and found to be frivolous.

Instead, they'll just go to Large Company X and say, "You're using Linux. It infringes SO MANY PATENTS. Don't you want to buy liability protection from us?"

Yes, that's what I said: pay M$ anyway, whatever software you use.

Or they could step to small or medium software companies, and say: you have to pay us $XXX for each Y because you're infringing a lot of our patents.

That's my main worry.

They can make building software into something only the big companies can afford to do. Or indirectly create a Microsoft tax on any software. I hope the Open Invention Network (IBM, Sony, Philips, Novell, Red Hat and NEC) can put a stop to it.

Fortunately, I don't think they could do any of that in the EU.

 

[Simon F]

Well SCO don't seem to be having much success with this business model, then again MS can afford a lot more lawyer hours before they run out of money.

Weren't SCO claiming that they owned the copyright to portions of the Linux code? That is a different matter to patents.

 

[Frank]

Anyway, things like this is where capitalism breaks down: if you have a vast amount of money and lawyers, you can essentially make money by being nothing more than a big predator.

Doing what Microsoft does is simply regarded as: "good business practices". Kill or frighten the small, exort the big. It essentially becomes something that looks and functions like the Mafia on a corporate level, on the border of the law. Which is subject to the same manipulation. Like how they almost succeeded twice in getting software patents endorsed in the EU.

And it's not as if this is new behavior for Microsoft: far from it. Only the scale has grown over the years, and is replacing "innovative" products.

 

[Techno+]

Microsoft are so annoying, they want money for every piece of software on earth, like they invented the PC.

 

[Frank]

Btw, who can think of something that Microsoft did first? No prior art? I draw a big blank. To me, the only real patents they might have would have to be bought.

Then again, reading all the comments about the state of the US patent office, I think all those patents are simply FUD.

Also look at the list: 65 patents for this, 45 for that, 35 for something else, 15 for yet another thing. It's totally made up.

Not that any of that matters.

 

[poopypoo]

Microsoft are so annoying, they want money for every piece of software on earth, like they invented the PC.

...and then they wonder why so many people hate them so much, as if they're the savior of computing... how many other groups have you happily joined recently, which gave you the ultimatum, "Join us or die!"?

 

[Zengar]

Microsoft are so annoying, they want money for every piece of software on earth, like they invented the PC.

Well, actually they did.

 

[Nite_Hawk]

Well, actually they did.

No, they just made it popular.

Nite_Hawk

 

[Zengar]

Isn't it the same? Microsoft made computers reach the masses and for many peple out there Windows is a synonym for PC. I think, this has to be recognised.

Still, there is no reason to pay them any fines. Software patents is a ridiculous thing to begin with, and Microsoft will never go to court, for reasons Tim explained. It just isn't happening

 

[Zaphod]

Isn't it the same?

Not at all. That's like saying the major record labels invented music, or that Paris Hilton invented decadent excess.

Making a living by crafting or selling something, and having invented said something are two very distinct phenomena.

 

[Davros]

Btw, who can think of something that Microsoft did first?

Microsoft bob....

 

[Simon F]

....and "Clippy"

 

[Sonic]

I wonder how many patents Microsoft is infringing upon with its software.

 

[Frank]

I wonder how many patents Microsoft is infringing upon with its software.

That will only matter if they wake up the Sleeping Giant (IBM). And I don't think IBM is willing to spend hundreds of millions unless provoked.

 

[pascal]

That will only matter if they wake up the Sleeping Giant (IBM). And I don't think IBM is willing to spend hundreds of millions unless provoked.

IBM have granted the opensource with hundreds of patents. This M$ act is no surprise for me.

 

[Mize]

Well SCO don't seem to be having much success with this business model, then again MS can afford a lot more lawyer hours before they run out of money.

MS was funding SCO's lawyers...now that SCO has failed MS has to do its own dirty work. Until they provide the patents and infringements it's nothing but FUD.

 

[pascal]

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/pos...crosoft-patent-threat-it-works-both-ways.html

Linux kernel developer Linus Torvalds issued a public response yesterday to Microsoft's recent claim that Linux and associated open-source software applications infringe over 200 of the company's patents. In an interview with InformationWeek, Torvalds expresses skepticism regarding Microsoft's claims and says that is "more likely that Microsoft violates patents than Linux does." A formal response was also issued by the Open Invention Network (OIN), an organization that serves as arbiter of a patent commons backed by major corporations including Sony, IBM, and Nokia.