Ballmer Threatens Linux Patent Lawsuits 506
gillbates writes "Today Microsoft warned several Asian countries that using Linux could subject them to lawsuits, claiming that Linux violates '228 patents'. Apparently, Steve Ballmer believes he can enforce U.S. law in Asia." Ballmer is presumably speaking about this story. So, companies which sell insurance against lawsuits and companies which make competing products both warn of the dangers of using Linux. Maybe someone should point out that Microsoft is battling dozens of patent-infringement lawsuits itself, and any user of Microsoft software (including governments) could also be sued?
Maybe someone (Score:5, Insightful)
Well, that's helpful. (Score:5, Insightful)
Keep in mind that China is a Communist country and any concept of intellectual property is relatively novel.
Re:Good way to make friends (Score:1, Insightful)
They're not out to make friends. They're out to make money.
Ohh, suddenly I feel all validated... :-)
Patent Law (Score:2, Insightful)
FUD, FUD, FUD (Score:3, Insightful)
I suppose with the SCO FUD-fest against Linux imploding, that Ballmer feels the need to spread FUD direct from the source to combat the Penguin Horde advancing on the Gates of Redmond.
So what if they sue? (Score:5, Insightful)
The US could complain to the WTO or somebody, but they are toothless. China is too big to start a trade war with.
Poland just recently decided against supporting software patents in the EU. Does that mean they will not respect other countries' patents on software or just that they will not go along with Europe issuing them?
Just another typical day on Planet Ballmer... (Score:3, Insightful)
No law (Score:3, Insightful)
No, I think he's counting on it that Asia cannot prosecute Microsoft under U.S.A. racketeering laws.
FUD, FUD and more FUD (Score:2, Insightful)
This sort of MBA doublespeak makes my blood boil!
Windows is more secure? (Score:5, Insightful)
Hilarious. That is like saying "I am the strongest man in the world because I have brown hair, I wear shoes, and I am standing here right now."
Re:Good way to make friends (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Indemnified? (Score:5, Insightful)
Don't get me wrong, I'm no MS fanboy, but lets be clear about it. I don't think any company can safely claim to be 100% in the clear when it comes to patents. Not in the world we live in...
Re:Good way to make friends (Score:5, Insightful)
They're making a big effort to become the de facto software company in Asia, like they are in the U.S. and Europe. That's why they're making their software available at lower prices in stripped-down versions. In most parts of Asia, you don't have to justify NOT buying MS software - as you do here. That's what MS is trying to build in Asia. They are trying to make "friends" among businesses like they have here. That is the best way for them to make money.
But, as I wrote in my previous post, I think this tactic may be too aggressive and backfire by putting people off. At least I hope people won't buckle to a show of trumped-up muscle. If they truly decided MS software is what's best for them, more power to them. But I hope they won't be scared into buying it. And I don't think they will.
Re:Ho hum (Score:3, Insightful)
You just said it. They are competing by doing better than the competition. Just that they are trying to win over not customers but judges. It's probably easier that way - customers are either stuck on Windows or addicted to free - either way you won't get a lot of money from them.
Writing software doesn't make you money anymore, so you have to look elsewhere. Some companies provide value added services. But that's only for the big guys; who's going to buy them if you don't have brand recognition? Anyone can support a Linux installation - so unless you're big, you have to compete with all the other small guys. That, again, means little money. Fortunately, the USPTO creates new opportunities for making money!
Re:pirated copies of linux (Score:2, Insightful)
Assumed ACE (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Typical...... (Score:5, Insightful)
People and companies outside the U.S. have legal action taken against them in U.S. courts all the time. While they can't necessarily do anything to that person/company in their own country, they can effect the status of that person/company with regards to dealings in and with the U.S. In layman's terms, that person/company is put on the shit list.
Microsoft says: (Score:5, Insightful)
While I generally take legal threats and action fairly seriously, my knee-jerk reaction is that Microsoft will be laughed out of the arena on this one. This would be a persuit that would turn the public against them. I can see the IBM propaganda commercials on TV now. They'd be depicting a hobbyist writing making something in their garage or basement followed quickly by a SWAT team with guns pointed at his head.
While it's true that business has taken a natural interest in Linux. It's free, it's reliable, it's flexible, it's customizable and it's everywhere and simply growing and growing. It can't be stopped. Anything that Microsoft does againt the users of Linux will certainly make them look even more evil in the public's eye than ever before.
Public opinion has turned against the RIAA and MPAA because they're now known for suing children and little old ladies. Clear Channel has bad enough vibe out there that they are operating under the names of the companies they bought out just to hide their identity since many people no longer want to go to Clear Channel events. Most people accept Microsoft as part of their computer like a keyboard, mouse or monitor. But when people and small businesses start getting sued and the public gets wind of it, not only will it serve as free advertisement for the new "Underdog" but it'll cause a lot of negative opinion against Microsoft. Apple will start collecting more fans as their next home PC will be a happy-faced G5 running something that's not Microsoft.
Go ahead Microsoft... make my day.
Since When Did... (Score:3, Insightful)
China has the second most powerful military and the fastest growing economy. Plus they are not a democracy.... again, why would they care?
What about BSD code? (Score:3, Insightful)
and what about all the BSD code in Winders.... Yes it is sprinkled all through it. Look at the CL FTP client. Also what about SFU (Services For Unix) This is built on Open Source.
Guess Steve will have to sue himself!
Re:Windows is more secure? (Score:4, Insightful)
Interesting. I find the Authors name usually to be in the README, THANKS, AUTHORS files and / or CVS commits.
The changelogs are also useful.
Re:MS CANT use patents to stifle competition (Score:4, Insightful)
Why yes, they can. It's legal! And they will. What makes you think they would not?
If MS attempts to use a patent to stifle Linux uptake, the courts can strip the patent from them even if it IS a valid patent.
Very VERY unlikely. The courts over and over side with big business and patent holders. Eola was a fluke.
Suing your customers, or THREATENING to sue your customers is not a proven successful business tactic.
SCO is the exception, and had it not been for the fact that Linux had Red Hat, Novell, and IBM behind it, SCO's threatening may very well have been successful. In other cases, threatening your customers works quite well when you own the market.
IBM has more patents than God, and their business interest is in protecting Linux.
Hog wash. IBM's business is protecting IMB. SCO is a little piss-ant, and IBM knows it can squash them, and have fun doing it. Microsoft would be a much different case. IBM and M$ would have worked out a very friendly financial arrangement with licenses and everything.
I understand how you feel, but your views do not take into account reality. Sorry.
Desperation (Score:5, Insightful)
Paraphrasing from Mark Twain, "the threat of legal action is the last refuge of a scoundrel."
Steve Ballmer has an uphill battle to regain credibility among IT decision-makers if he has to abandon a tactic of directly comparing Microsoft's products to Linux and FOSS on the strict basis of features, price, bugs, security, standards adherence, kindly upgrade path lacking forced obsolescence, licensing terms, etc.
At least in the developed world where Microsoft has dominated the marketplace for years he can always bring up the Windows to Linux migration cost (neglecting to mention anything about the Windows to Windows migration costs) and backward compatibility to bolster his argument.
With this level of desperation, and with SCO's case foundering, MS may decide to fight more openly against Linux in the legal arena. But making such a move is risky from a PR perspective because it will cast MS in a bad light, opposing freely-available, zero-cost technology that helps anyone who cares to use it. While MS might be losing millions of dollars as companies choose FOSS in place of Microsoft products, it's not as if intellectual property violations (if they even exist) cause an equal - or even comparable - slide of millions of dollars into the pockets of greedy IP violators. Rather, most FOSS developers have minuscule wealth compared to Microsoft and stand to gain much less by contributing their work to the world at large. Pressing IP claims against software available to anyone and independently contributed by someone working from scratch in their garage at night is likely to smack of a David vs Goliath dispute, with Goliath wanting his tax from everyone else and David wanting to let the people keep their money.
Additionally, in the developing world they must regard claims of ownership of intellectual property as a curious and amusing Western contrivance for making money and preserving wealth, especially in light of the more preposterous patents that the USPTO has given over the last number of years.
Noise and smoke (Score:5, Insightful)
One way to look at it is that lawsuits are an expensive way to make noise. Ballmer has to make noise or else folks will resume paying attention to their work and finding that MS is an obstacle. Or worse, that folks will start checking out other options like OpenOffice.org or OS X or one of the Linux distros. Or, even worse, they'll start to realise that MS stock is a worse investment than Enron:
Mainstream press is starting to figure out that MS-Windows dominance will last only another 2- 4 years [zdnet.com.au] and that only because of the enormous marketing and lobbying engine that MS is. To add weight to that, MS blocked its employees from exercising their "underwater" stock options during 2004. That was intended to increase retention, as employees need to remain with Microsoft to receive the payout [zdnet.co.uk]. Retention would not be an issue unless the company looked to have no future.
Many execs, however haven't been able to empty their portfolios yet and want more delay.
"I have in my hand..." (Score:5, Insightful)
(if you don't get it...) [wikipedia.org]
Insolence! (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Good way to make friends (Score:3, Insightful)
Earning a living is not bad - its how you earn that living that counts. Microsoft is one of the worse in this regard.
Re:FUD, FUD, FUD (Score:3, Insightful)
10 years ago the calculation was that Windows NT offers the migration path away from UNIX to a Microsoft world (Windows NT is certified UNIX95 compliant, even though in 1995, Microsoft owned the UNIX trademark
It's Official! (Score:4, Insightful)
Balmer's attacks certainly mean that the threat on the server is real, but it may also speak to what MS projects on the desktop. No, Linux isn't likely to take the desktop in the US, but MS is probably projecting lowered sales of Windows there too. Why? Because the PC market is reaching saturation with today's machines more than powerful enough to meet the needs of most, which means fewer new PCs will be sold. Most sales of Windows are in new PC bundles. PCs also face competition from other increasingly capable consumer electronics like cell phones, music players, and handheld game consoles. These competing devices are less expensive than a PC and much easier to use. All of this means eroding sales of Windows over the next few years. Microsoft may have been holding out hope that the growing PC market in Asian might rescue Windows, but the Chinese-Korean-Japanese joint Linux venture threatens to close that door. So Balmer is probably getting a little desperate. Personally, I think if Microsoft is to survive, it'll be Bill Gates who figures out what they need to do. I think that in the end Microsoft will have to learn to play nice with Linux just as Sun seems to be doing now.
EH? (Score:4, Insightful)
So why is this?
Well, last time I checked, most of Europe is in the WTO.
Now, as you can read on Groklaw also, Poland just decided on not supporting the EU software patent proposal, thereby removing the majority that was there, so it seems that patents are a logn way off in the EU for now.
MS can (and should imho) engorce copyright, but to claim that they can enforce their patents in any country that becomes a WTO member ? From what is happening in EUrope it seems they are more then a bit off there.
This is a typical case of what can properly be called FUD.
Re:Groklaw started all of this (Score:5, Insightful)
OSRM hired PJ to do a free-lance project for OSRM, a project PJ wanted to do on her own anyway but didn't have the time to do it. The project was to update the Linux timeline. OSRM hired PJ to do this project on a new site, Grokline, not on Groklaw, and said she could spend as much time as she needed to work on Groklaw. This was good as before PJ had to do freelance paralegal work which prevented her from spending as much time on Groklaw as she wanted. Now she could spend a lot more time.
Everybody's happy except those people who believe the lie that PJ sells insurance. She doesn't. She has no controlling interest in OSRM. She was hired by them to do a specific job, a job in fact that will lessen the need for people to get insurance!
As for the 228 or 283 patent violations, that gets thrown around loosely in very inaccurate ways. Read the orignal OSRM press release (yes, it came from them, not from PJ who had nothing to do with it) and you'll see that OSRM is NOT saying that Linux violates patents, but that in today's litigation-happy climate, it's good to be aware that there are a bunch of patents out there that are vague enough to possible be used in nuisance lawsuits by someone hostile to Linux. It doesn't mean Linux really DOES violate those patents, but that unscrupulous companies might try to pretend otherwise. As SCO proved, you can be completely wrong and yet gum up the court system for a long time while you blab about your lies. That costs money. So OSRM, as other groups did, stepped up and said if you were in a vulnerable position (that is, prominent and a likely target from a money-hungry unscrupulous company), they would offer insurance in the case that you did get take to court.
Individual developers don't have to worry about it. They're not the cash-rich targets the SCOs of the world seek to shake down.
None of the above will shake the confidence of the anti-Groklaw shills that are spreading lies about PJ in an attempt to discredit her. They may not be in SCO's employ, they might even be sincere (sincerely wrong, of course), but the net effect is to help SCO's efforts. Way to go, trolls. I hope anyone else who reads this will take the time to research what I said to prove for themselves that what I said is a lot more accurate than what the anti-Groklaw folks are saying.
228 Patents (Score:2, Insightful)
Secondly, who owns them?
Re:FUD, FUD, FUD (Score:3, Insightful)
That depends on how much Linux is then used in the servers. Making Longhorn clients incompatible to Linux servers may well have the effect of making it harder to adopt Longhorn if Linux servers are common enough then. That is, a Longhorn incompatibility strategy can only work if MS already has enough server market share at that time.
Why... (Score:2, Insightful)
MS Problem (Score:3, Insightful)
All Ballmer did with this statement is acknowledge that they were going to start a business war. What he may fail to see is that the business war has already started. He just told them where they were going to throw a salvo. So now they can posture being defensless and talk and negotiate on this point, while making other plans.
I really think that his statements were meant for the ear of US businesses.
I Remember a Guy Like Ballmer.... (Score:2, Insightful)
Normally, thugs like these end up in prison, usually for assault-with-intent. In this case, unfortunately, this particular thug managed to hook-up with a corporation with a personality just like his....
Re:Noise and smoke (Score:3, Insightful)
What the hell you talking about?
1. Who WANTS to exercise underwater options? That means that you LOSE money because you suddenly have options that cost WAY more than the market value is and selling those would instantly lose a ton of money.
2. Blocked? Well there is this thing called Vesting....which happens everywhere which gradually increases the number of options you can exercise. Its not necessarily blocking you, you just dont HAVE the other options yet.
3. In 2003 Microsoft made an offer to buy back ANY underwater options that were above a certain price (including options that had not vested!!) and paid out cash for these.
I think that your facts are way wrong and you should know what your talking about before commenting again.
Oh, and you can not be sued for using Microsoft Software. If you would actually READ the EULA, you would know that MS indemnifies (too big of a word? Means we take responsibility for...) our customers against law suits. So legal responsibility for IP rests squarly on MS.
Sometimes the FUD on slashdot really gets annoying.
Not interpreting article correctly... (Score:5, Insightful)
However the article makes a terrible assumption, that Microsoft is way outspending "Open Source" with R&D dollars!! Six billion (for MS) to ten million (OSDL labs R&D budget).
If you think about it that is really absurd, you should really think about it in terms of raw manpower and not dollars spent. In software some guy in a garage working weekends is every bit a potential source of a great idea as some guy sitting on a million dollars worth of hardware. There is no supercollider or electron microscope of the software world without which it would be hard to make a contribution. Counting manpower, Microsoft is hopelessly outclassed by many orders of magnitude.
So, basically I would say just don't quote that article at all!
Re:Noise and smoke (Score:3, Insightful)
One way to look at it is that lawsuits are an expensive way to make noise.
Precisely. The proper way to stop the noise is to pull the carpet out from under the noise maker, not to buy millions of earplugs. Do you hate Microsoft's sleazy tactics? Do you hate bogus software patents? Then do everything within your power to make Open Source succeed in the marketplace. Whether that's writing or improving F/OSS in your spare time, donating to projects, convincing PHB's in your workplace to try alternatives, or even changing your career so you can focus on making a difference, just do something! We should not be driven by fear, but we should recognize a valid threat and take steps necessary to eliminate it.
Re:Not interpreting article correctly... (Score:2, Insightful)
Taken straight from the top of the artidle:
Microsoft's dominance in operating systems will continue - though only for the next few years.
You're right...it doesn't imply that it might wane...it implies that it will.
Not that I agree...I think microsoft (unfortunately) will be dominant for a lot longer than that.
big mistake (Score:1, Insightful)
The fact that Balmer would try such a risky move says to me that Microsoft is getting really desperate about OSS.
Re:This is an excellent sign (Score:3, Insightful)
Bush and Microsoft (Score:2, Insightful)
Since the supreme is own3d by your dearly chosen ass of the millenium (Bush) and, he in turn, holds ballmer as a great big chunk of what he calls his 'base', software patents will be accepted and confimed in final words by the supreme.
Congrats americans. Youve fucked up.... twice this millenium.
A common misconception (Score:3, Insightful)
Just shift it to a US naval base in Cuba - no law applies there.
The economic credibility of patents (Score:2, Insightful)
I believe it will be only a matter of time before the economic credibility of patents comes crumbling down like a castle of cards. This is the argument that will ultamately win the fight against patents.
Value of flimsy ideas comming out of the patent system $0.
Economic loss due to having substantial reduced competition, next to zero innovation and overheads in software development $mega bucks.
It just is not worth it!
Now if you consider the term "intellectual property" and the parallel to physical property, having software patents is equivalent to saying that air should be owned by a corporation (thus making you pay for air) or that I have to pay someone a license to look at the moon, or that some corporation owns a part of airspace so that you have to pay 1,000,000 corporations to travel from Australia to USA. We have private property rights essential for a functional society that believes in liberty but we have also have limits to property ownership also essential for a functional and society that believes in liberty.
If you consider the Kyoto protocol, this protocol intends to moneterise carbon emission levels not for the heck of it, but because limiting and moneterising carbon emissions has much greater economic gain than the loss and overheads involved with placing an artificial barrier to the carbon emission levels. Thus this same principle must apply to patents.
There has been a huge level of innovation in OSS software. The GPL which is tied into copyright is mainly responsible for this. It has nothing to do with patents. The way the patent system is now, with a weekend worth of brainstorming I can generate a million dollars of patents. Where is the value? Now you really need patents when you have to invest in a billion dollar labratory to invent new innovations in any field. But to give someone a monopoly for so many software generations for zero value, we are just selling out our future!
Consider the hinderence to innovation. Spend 10 million dollars per innovation or spend 0 dollars per innovation, which will you choose? If I was given the option I would choose the cheaper option. But any patent authority that is meant to encourage innovation must make every company that applies for a monopoly really EARN their monopoly, which is not happening, nor will it ever happen with software patents.
The View From Singapore (Score:4, Insightful)
Remember folks, sg is about to move to a US-like copyright regime starting this Jan, after a successful round of FTA talks with the US. Essentially, we're about to get a DMCA-like law here, which includes criminalisation of piracy (currently, only selling pirated software is illegal; now even possession is punishable by jail), and yup, you guessed it, patenting of software.
Gov.sg organisations, which have been MS-friendly so far, are therefore running scared, and are fast moving over to OSS; to cite another example, the sg library system has also moved its systems over to Linux now. Smalltime .net-only ISV's like mine are already feeling the pinch; I know of at least two other ISV's like ours who are seriously considering migrating their code-bases to Mono or something like that.
Ballmer's comments should be taken in this context here; he's basically telling us that we can, possibly, run, but not hide, from the MS-patents keiretsu.