Microsoft Patent Deal Could Leave Novell Behind 246
robbyyy writes to mention a Computer Business Review Online article about commentary from Bruce Perens to Novell, about their recent deal with Microsoft. He argues that the company should quickly turn its back on the deal, because Novell risks being left behind by open source progress. From the article: "While Linux creator Linus Torvalds has previously stated that the Linux kernel will remain on the GPL v2 license, much of the code that makes up a complete Linux distribution is owned by the FSF, which intends to re-license all its code to GPL v3 as soon as it is completed in early 2007. 'In the face of these changes, Novell will probably be stuck with old versions of the software, under old licenses, with Novell sustaining the entire cost and burden of maintaining that software,' Perens wrote, adding that Novell faces a choice of sticking with Microsoft and being left behind, or turning its back on the patent deal."
Scam. It's a scam. (Score:5, Insightful)
Look at the time line:
* Novell and Microsoft shake hands on an exclusive agreement to create better cross-compatibility between their software.
* After the agreement is signed, Microsoft does a 180 and publicly states that the crux of the deal was really Novell admitting Linux violates Microsoft's IP and this was a license agreement.
* Novell is saying 'WTF? Where did this come from? You scammed us!!1!!'
* Microsoft looks like a hero to the DOJ for saying 'We're not evil, see? Novell admits Linux violates our IP and they now license it from us. Here's the contract!'
I'm sure Microsoft will somehow defend the contract by connecting to their Xenix OS they sold through Tandy in the early 1980's.
The agreement was nothing more than the most expensive anti-Linux PR campaign ever conceived. Novell and Bruce Perens aren't the bad guys here, they just got scammed (Please, for the sake of the future of Novell, please don't forward Bruce any emails that state the Prince of Nigeria needs some cash to escape the country).
This may also give Microsoft legal footing to attempt to go after Red Hat if they really want to. All they have to do is bring up the Novell deal in court to make themselves look like angels.
This is just my $0.02, take with a grain of salt, your mileage may vary...
The Damage is Done (Score:5, Insightful)
Now the question is who's leaving them behind. Let's take, for instance, the SAMBA team that urged Novell to reconsider [slashdot.org]. Why was it the SAMBA team? Well, probably because people on both sides saw this deal as an tacit acknowledgement that several open source projects infringe on Microsoft intellectual property. SAMBA would be a pretty easy target for Microsoft, in my opinion and that's why they voiced their concerns so quickly--I'm sure more will follow once the realization hits the entire community when the precise details of the deal are released. I've seen figures anywhere from $100-450 million USD to be accepted by Novell from Microsoft. Why? Hopefully we'll find out.
Interestingly enough, the finest details I can find on this deal come from Novell's Website [novell.com] with the thought provoking title, "NOVELL & MICROSOFT COLLABORATE--CUSTOMERS WIN." Once these details surface, after the FSF's lawyer is done picking them over with a fine toothed comb, then I think we'll know who's still with Novell and who's 'left them behind.'
I'm going to say right now that--pending the GPLv2 allowing this deal--projects feel genuinely threatened by Microsoft lawsuits will alter their licenses to exclude potential deals regarding their software like the one Novell made. If this deal goes through, what we'll most likely see is SuSE being pretty much the basic Linux kernel and not a whole lot more except (as the summary states) the frozen old releases of software. Ironically, the eventual evolution of the Linux kernel will probably render these releases unusable which will mean at some point Novell will have to stick with an old edition of Linux or make the upgrades and patches itself to the rest of the software. I would bet that Open Office and a lot of the Windows-y environments (like KDE & Gnome) might adjust to this and move away from SuSE just to be safe. After all, these agreements that give you protection against Microsoft litigation based on intellectual property is the first step in Microsoft's eventual licensing of the software you've written.
If this deal hasn't been signed in blood, then I would urge every project that would jump ship to publicly notify Novell they will (the only one I know of is SAMBA--there must be more). But if the ink has dried on the contract and they're checking it against the GPLv2, I fear the damage is already done. Look to the future and hope the GPLv3 that's eventually ratified stops things like this from happening.
Even if this fails under the GPLv2 and the deal never goes down, will you ever be able to look at Novell the same way again? I'm not sure I will.
Act fast! (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Scam. It's a scam. (Score:2, Insightful)
Little things like gcc/g++, glibc, all the unix user space tools,
Without the FSF stuff Linux would not exist - there's just be a kernel with nothing to run on top of it. It'd be easier to ditch Linus's kernel and replace it with something else (BSD, HURD, etc) than to replace the rest of it.
Re:FSF owns what? (Score:5, Insightful)
And more importantly, gcc, binutils and glibc. Good luck to Novell to maintain those all by themselves.
Re:Scam. It's a scam. (Score:4, Insightful)
Even though GNU deserves large parts of the credit, they don't deserve all the credit.
Re:The end of the world is not nigh (Score:5, Insightful)
The FSF can't *retroactively* change the licencing, so Novell can continue to use current versions of GPL v.2 software, BUT, what the FSF can do, and is apparently planning to do, is to change the licence on all the software they own copyright to (presumably including gcc, glibc) from GPL v.2 to GPL v.3. Novell will then be forced to choose to continue using the old frozen GPL v.2 versions, or to keep up with the everyone else and use the newer GPL v.3 versions which would force them (or rather Microsoft) to back out of the Microsoft deal because of the patent implications forced by GPL v.3.
Owning glibc puts FSF in a pretty powerful position, since even if Linus is keeping the kernel under GPL v.2, the kernel is in of itself useless without glibc, and any kernel enhancements would be useless without userland (glibc) support. Of couse it's nt just glibc - the majority of Linux userland is GNU/FSF.
Re:Don't stick a FORK in Novell yet (Score:4, Insightful)
Not a problem, once every GNU software goes GPLv3, they won't need Novell to do the same, mark my word.
Who says the GPL2 releases of userland tools will freeze?
Every people that know about them and works with them. A fork on these would be a HUGE painful task.
This is Free Software, people, and anyone can maintain it, including a multimillion dollar company and all the other people who don't like GPL3. All of FSF's software may be headed for a fork
I think you don't have any idea of the task at hand. Anyway, a fork is not a bad thing.
But if you really believe that all the people out of the MS-Novell deal will contribute to software with a license (GPLv2) that will only help Novell, with risk of a lawsuit as a reward, you're again in for a very rude awakening. I bet all these GPLv2 sofware will go GPLv3 quick, so that it doesn't happen !
Re:Scam. It's a scam. (Score:5, Insightful)
The FSF has reimplemented quite a bit of the BSD userspace tools. Most Linux distributions use the GNU versions instead of the BSD ones. Combine that with the fact that the FSF has been very savvy about getting developers to sign papers turning over their copyrights and the FSF is far and away the largest copyright holder in any given Linux distribution. Novell can pretend that the FSF's opinion doesn't matter, but it does.
Add in the fact that the Samba developers are very upset with Novell and Novell is in serious trouble.
Re:Scam. It's a scam. (Score:3, Insightful)
Go read the changelogs. You will be surprised.
While writing a compiler and a little unix utility might not be rocket science, writing a good compiler and reliable, solid, standard compliant little unix itilities is a bit more difficult than what you seem to think.
Re:Act fast! (Score:3, Insightful)
"Has more functions" != "is more functional". Not for all classes of users.
Re:The end of the world is not nigh (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Only partial maintenance burden (Score:4, Insightful)
Yes, Novell could abandon the codebase and customer base they bought for $210,000,000 and start over with BSD.
However, their shareholders might start questioning the decision making processes of their management.
To abandon that kind of investment, and the time and money invested in porting their network apps to linux and start over with BSD might very well cost them more money than Microsoft paid them in the first place.