Here's A Surprise: Red Hat Wins Patent Lawsuit In East Texas

from the didn't-see-that-coming dept

It's so rare that we post about a good patent ruling coming out of East Texas that it seems worth highlighting that they do happen. The latest is that Red Hat won after being sued by a patent hoarder, who claimed that every version of Linux infringed on its patents. The jury found that the patents in question were invalid and tossed them out. You may recall that we actually wrote about this lawsuit when it was filed, noting that the company who filed it, IP Innovation, was actually one of many shell companies representing Acacia, which for many years has been a leader in hoarding patents and suing companies who actually innovate. We also noted at the time that the patents in question seemed highly questionable. The fact that even a jury (which tends to find patents valid the majority of the time) found the patents ridiculous is pretty telling.

Filed Under: east texas, linux, patents, software patents
Companies: acacia, ip innovation, novell, red hat

SCO Says Jury Didn't Really Mean What It Said... And Judge Should Order Novell To Hand SCO Unix Copyrights

from the good-luck-with-that dept

SCO really is quite the zombie of a company, isn't it? It just never dies. It's been a month since getting smacked down yet again and having a jury declare that Novell still owns the Unix copyrights, and they were never transferred to SCO (after a judge had already said the same thing). And yet, as Slashdot alerts us, SCO has now told the judge he should order Novell to hand over the copyrights anyway. Talk about getting desperate. When will SCO finally be put out of its misery?

Filed Under: copyrights, linux, software, unix
Companies: novell, sco

Novell Wins Yet Again; Says SCO Never Got Unix Copyrights

from the is-it-dead-yet? dept

Could the case that never ends finally end? As you may recall, years back SCO sued IBM, claiming that Linux infringed on Unix, whose rights SCO acquired earlier. Except... in 2003 Novell tossed a bit of a firecracker into the whole thing by noting that it still owned the copyrights on Unix. The case went back and forth for ages, with a lot of questionable activity (including questions concerning Microsoft's supposed funding of SCO's activities), including accusations that the whole thing was an attempt to pump-and-dump SCO stock. Back in 2008, we thought it was finally over when a judge ruled that Novell owned the copyrights, leading many to expect SCO to finally just die off. Instead, it declared bankruptcy, got a lifeline and continued the fight -- leading to an appeals court ruling that the question over copyright ownership needed to be determined by a jury rather than a judge. As we noted at the time, this was hardly (as SCO's Darl McBride insisted) a vindication for SCO -- it was just another chance for SCO to lose in court.

And lose, it did. As was widely expected, the jury has that Novell owns the copyrights on Unix and SCO basically has no case. Once again, this suggests that SCO has never had a case, and has just been wasting everyone's time (and a lot of people's money) for a long, long, long time.

But, of course, it's probably not over yet. SCO says it will continue the original lawsuit against IBM, saying that it won't be over copyright, but breach of contract claims. Of course, it's now been almost a decade and we still haven't seen what it is that IBM did wrong. SCO still hasn't shown anyone what code breached what contract. However, as Groklaw notes, even if SCO (with what money?) keeps fighting the lawsuit against IBM over contract terms, that's a much more limited lawsuit, as the terms are just between IBM and SCO -- and wouldn't impact the wider "Linux" ecosystem, since others did not sign any kind of contract with SCO. Still, at some point, you would hope that the folks still left at SCO involved in this case realize enough is enough and just let it die.

Filed Under: linux, unix
Companies: ibm, novell, sco

Amazon Has To Pay Microsoft To Use Linux?

from the fud-fud-fud-fud dept

Every few years, Microsoft tries to convince the world that Linux violates its patents. Usually the company gives some arbitrary number of patents. However, when asked to show proof, the company goes quiet. It's the usual FUD. Last year was the first time the issue ever actually showed up in a lawsuit, when Microsoft sued TomTom, but for the most part, it's still not clear what about Linux infringes on Microsoft patents. Still, that doesn't mean Microsoft can't use such FUD to get others to pay up. The latest is that Amazon and Microsoft have done a patent cross-licensing deal. These sorts of "we won't sue you, if you don't sue us" deals are pretty common in the tech world, and hardly noteworthy, other than the fact that apparently some of the patents Amazon are getting protected against being sued over -- concern how it uses Linux:

The deal covers both Amazon's Kindle product as well as the company's use of Linux-based servers.

Even though it's a straight cross-licensing deal, it doesn't sound like any money changed hands, Amazon still had to pay cash to Microsoft, on top of effectively paying more by licensing its own patents. It does seem pretty problematic, doesn't it, when a company has to "pay" Microsoft (whether in cash or via licenses to its own patents) just to use Linux? Perhaps it's time to redefine the "Microsoft tax."

Filed Under: linux, patents
Companies: amazon, microsoft

Microsoft Cracks Down On Windows Piracy In China... So Pirating Group Offers Up Ubuntu That Looks Like XP

from the happy-microsoft dept

It's been pointed out before how much Microsoft has benefited from having its operating system and office suites "pirated," in that it helped make Microsoft a de facto standard, that created lock-in and network effects, that helped make Microsoft into the massively successful company it is today. Even Bill Gates has famously said:

"And as long as they're going to steal it, we want them to steal ours. They'll get sort of addicted, and then we'll somehow figure out how to collect sometime in the next decade."

Except... of course, Microsoft has been pushing hard to "stop" that kind of "piracy" in China, and it may be having an unintended effect. Slashdot points us to the news that a group that had been offering pirated copies of Windows is now offering a copy of Ubuntu Linux, designed to look just like Windows XP. So, congrats, Microsoft, in "stopping" some piracy in China, you may just be driving users to Linux instead.

Filed Under: china, linux, piracy, ubuntu, windows, windows xp
Companies: microsoft

Waste Of Money: Pro-Linux Group Has To Buy Microsoft Patents

from the instead-of-doing-something-useful dept

A bunch of folks have been submitting the news that the "pro-linux" group the Open Invention Network recently purchased some former Microsoft patents via a third party. A few quick thoughts:

• It seems like a shame that money had to be spent by these groups just to protect themselves from lawsuits for developing useful software.
• Microsoft apparently refused to let OIN bid directly on the patents, leading to the middleman. This seems rather petty. If Microsoft really doesn't want the patents any more and isn't planning on doing anything with them, why not sell them to a pro-Linux group?
• If Microsoft had no problem getting rid of them, I'm guessing they're not among the couple of hundred patents Microsoft keeps insisting Linux violates, without ever actually naming any specific patents.

All in all, this is a pretty depressing story, showing money being wasted, rather than put to good use doing actual innovation.

Filed Under: linux, open source, patents

SCO... Not Dead Yet... Appeals Court Reverses Novell Ruling; Trial Likely

from the not-dead-yet dept

And you thought the insane nightmare was over. Two years ago it seemed like the long national nightmare that was SCO's claims of copyright infringement in Linux were over. A judge ruled that SCO did not actually own the copyrights it claimed it did, and that they still belonged to Novell. While SCO received a slap on the wrist ($2.5 million) for this, it basically wiped out the key part of SCO's lawsuit against IBM, and led SCO to file for bankruptcy. Some investors supposedly pumped some money into SCO to keep it breathing, but later details on that made the whole deal seem very, very sketchy. However, now SCO might have a very slight chance to turn things around.

A judge has overturned part of the lower court's original ruling on who owns the copyrights to Unix, and ordered a full jury trial take place to determine who actually owns the copyright. Oddly, the court did not overturn the part where SCO has to pay Novell $2.5 million -- which could push the company over the final edge. If, however, SCO can stay alive, and it does go to trial, the company could (and likely will) still lose that trial (and, we're still twiddling our thumbs and waiting for any evidence from SCO that IBM actually infringed on the UNIX copyrights... but that's another story and another lawsuit). SCO's Darl McBride (how he's still running the show is beyond me) is claiming this is a validation for SCO, but that's not even close to true. All the court is saying is that there wasn't enough for the summary judgment on the copyright ownership, and the issue should be taken up in a full jury trial. That's not a "validation" of SCO's position -- it's a small, and likely temporary, lifeline.

Filed Under: copyright, linux, unix
Companies: novell, sco

Microsoft Finally Reveals Some Of The Patents It Claims Linux Infringes... Sorta

from the here-we-go dept

For years, Microsoft has waved around the FUD stick concerning the 200+ patents it claimed to hold that Linux implementations supposedly infringed upon. However, when confronted, the company never seemed willing to name a single such patent. However, it looks like the company is starting to swing that stick with a bit more force. Horacio Gutierrez, Microsoft's "patent guy," fresh off a promotion, is suing navigation device maker TomTom over a variety of patents, including a few that relate to TomTom's implementation of Linux. Gutierrez has a somewhat troubling view on patents, where he believes that all tech companies should effectively be paying pretty much everyone else patent licensing fees before they can build any products. Rather than seeing that as a problem -- he thinks it represents a good thing. It's difficult to see what the benefit is in all that wasted money changing hands... other than it's probably what pays his salary. Not surprisingly, Microsoft is using the infamous ITC loophole to get two shots at forcing TomTom to pay up -- meaning that it's both sued the company in court, and gone to the ITC to have it try to block the import of TomTom products.

As for the patents themselves, looking them over, it's almost scary how broad they are. Some of them apply to basic in-car navigation features, while others focus on the file system TomTom is using (which is an implementation of Linux). If you'd like to look them over, here they are:

• Vehicle computer system with open platform architecture
• Method and system for generating driving directions (check out the claims on this one...)
• Methods and Arrangements for Interacting with Controllable Objects within a Graphical User Interface Environment Using Various Input Mechanisms
• Portable computing device-integrated appliance
• Vehicle computer system with wireless internet connectivity (would be great if some IP lawyers could explain how this one passes the KSR test for combining existing products)
• Common name space for long and short filenames (ditto concerning whether or not this passes the Bilski test concerning pure "software" patents)
• Common name space for long and short filenames (same name, slightly different patent -- same questions raised, however)
• Method and System for File System Management Using a Flash-Erasable, Programmable, Read-only Memory

It's those last three that apply to TomTom's implementation of Linux. While Gutierrez insists this is not Microsoft beginning its patent assault on Linux, anyone wondering about those mythical 200+ patents might want to start checking on those three patents first. Unfortunately, chances are that TomTom will just settle. No matter how strong a case it might have, it's going to be cheaper to settle, and that's exactly what Microsoft is counting on.

Filed Under: horacio gutierrez, linux, navigation, patents
Companies: microsoft, tomtom

Cuba Uses Linux To Stick It To The US

from the take-that-evil-capitalist-pigs dept

It looks like Fidel Castro's plan to build a Cuban software industry has paid off, somewhat: the country has announced that it's launched its own variant of Linux. The goal is to replace the Microsoft operating systems that runs most of Cuba's computers, because the government sees Windows as a security threat. Insert your own punchline there, but for Cuba, it's because it believes US authorities have access to Microsoft code, and can therefore spy on Cuba through it. That's debatable, but so is the claim from the dean of the School of Free Software at Cuba's University of Information Sciences, who says the "black holes and malicious codes" in proprietary software "doesn't happen with free software." While open-source projects often offer better security than proprietary platforms, open-source or "free" software isn't inherently more secure. But somehow it seems ideology is probably more important than facts here.

Filed Under: cuba, linux

SCO Looking To Ditch Actual Business To Try To Keep Lawsuit Going

from the going-full-on-patent-troll dept

Slashdot points us to the latest in the never-ending saga of SCO trying to claim infringement in Linux. Despite massive setbacks that should have just ended the quixotic campaign, it appears that SCO is looking to sell off its actual businesses in order to keep the lawsuit campaign going. It's amazing that after losing pretty much every aspect of this campaign from the very beginning, that folks at SCO still think it's worth pursuing.

Filed Under: copyright, linux, patents
Companies: sco