Why Is Microsoft Using Patent FUD Against Linux? Perhaps Because It Works
from the not-too-hard-to-figure-out dept
Earlier this year, Microsoft made some news by claiming (not for the first time) that Linux violated all sorts of Microsoft patents, though it refused to name a single one. This seemed like a pretty sleazy strategy not just to get companies to license patents from Microsoft even though there was no proven need to do so, but also to scare some companies off from using Linux in the first place. It appears, unfortunately, that such efforts are having some effect. A new study found that the number one inhibitor against open source adoption was fear of patent or copyright infringement. Of course, the news isn't that bad, since it sounds like the benefits of open source software (price, stability, features, etc.) tend to outweigh that one fear in many cases. However, don't be surprised if Microsoft continues to play this card over and over again. Once again, though, it shows how intellectual property isn't being used to promote innovation, but to hold back innovation by creating uncertainty and fear in the market.Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: fud, linux, open source, patents
Companies: microsoft
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Is legal action possible?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Is legal action possible?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Is legal action possible?
PS... IANAL
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Is legal action possible?
If it isn't then I think this would be a worthwhile response. Only problem would be that anyone who actually produces code would have to distance themselves from this to avoid that triple liability for knowingly infringing a patent - perhaps contributions could be made anonymous?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Is legal action possible?
The real problem with a suit against MS is proving that you were financially damaged.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Is legal action possible?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
watch redhat on this one
redhat's response thus far has been a sort of "i'll believe it when i see it" approach, and i think that's what the approach that the whole community should be taking.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Goes to show you....
Patent infringement is something thats in no way shape or form increasingly risky because a piece of software is open or closed source. You have the same risks, either way.
Remember RIM?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Micro$oft's next move is to get "Open Source Certified", why is anybody's guess now, but my opinion is that they intend to infect the open source community with their own version of open source which won't be truly open source at all. They intend to divide the open source community by establishing their very own brand of open source. We are talking about a scheme as big as (forgive the Star Wars reference) Senator Palpatene's to become the first galactic emperor.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Well, according to the Inq
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=41395
OK, I know the Inq is full of B.S. most of the time, but when it comes to analysis, well, it sometimes does a credible job, mostly. I wouldn't even know where to begin with the whole "Microsoft is trying to take over the world again" meme, but as far as libel is concerned, you would have to be an injured party to sue.
What would be better is if the open source community could engage in honest debate with someone from Microsoft about this issue. Of course, I expect Microsoft to play "hide the football" for as long as possible, since, along with everyone else, I suspect that M$ has no case.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]