Novell sells out...

[morgoth]

Yup. Novell sells out to Microsoft in some nice patent trades...I like the way that Groklaw reports it:

http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20061102175508403

Here are my thoughts on the matter:

None of you see the big plan. First Novell kills SCO, to prove that it owns
UNIX copyrights etc. Then it sells that to Microsoft for LOTS of money. What
do you think Microsoft will do then? It will take the same action as what SCO
did vs Novell, except it will *own* UNIX and have LOTS of money (no risk of
bankruptcy from legal action unlike SCO). It won't get any competition from any
major corporation other than probably IBM. Oracle, HP, Novell, etc will all
side with Microsoft.

These are greedy corporate bastards, they don't for one single second care about
the GPL of FOSS. They want to bend and break Linux and FOSS to their own
commercial needs.

I give the GPL five years before it's suddenly found to be unconstitional in the
Supreme court. It'll be ruled invalid, and Linus and Co. will be happily able
to choose a less freer license like the BSD license, so Linux can be raped by
corporate interests. Do you think of those improvements will reach the 'peoples
Linux distributions'? Nope. It'll all be add-on proprietary code, heavily
hidden from the average user, only available to corporate customers.

The FSF will not have enough funds to legally challenge a juggernaut like
Microsoft, especially if the rest of the corporate industry gathers behind
Microsoft. Linux doesn't stand a chance.

For a long while now, I've protested against the corporate involvement in the
Linux kernel. These are the very reasons why. I'd rather a more 'ancient'
kernel with less features and abilities, than the corporate bastard-child that
it currently is. I'd prefer freedom.

Let's hope that the FSF gets HURD running very nicely, porting existing Linux
open source drivers to run stabily on it and then enough people in the community
get the commonsense to dump Linux and use the HURD.

This is further reason to me that the Linux kernel developers MUST move to GPL
v3 and ASAP. It is also clear to me that Linus is a shill for the corporate
sponsors now. I've said this before and I'll keep saying it till the cows come
home. The proof is visible. I urge all responsible kernel developers to either
release your knew code under the GPL v3 when it's released, or for existing
code, to re-release it under GPL v3. All it takes is a majority of kernel
contributors to have the guts to stand up. Linus can then either stop accepting
patches from pro-GPL v3 developers, or accept it. I personally think he'll get
Andrew [Morton] to not accept any GPL v3 code.

Dave

Dave

edit: Oh and I believe that Novell has broken the GPL as well...

[danieldk]

I really like CentOS. Maybe I should stay with Debian and/or Slackware.


Same feeling here Jeff. At least Debian can't be bought, and they usually make smart moves. Debian and gNewSense feel like safe havens.

[darkman]

I use SuSE linux 10.0 on my main desktop, but now, I've been thinking after this news break of changing to something else. I had a bad feeling about this when I heard that there was going to be some sort-of announcement. This whole deal gives one a sort-of sicking feeling in the pit of ones stomach. I am going to be looking around now for my main desktop replacement. I have eyes for maybe Knoppix 5.0. I may try the recent Debian. I would like to maybe use SimplyMepis, but it always had problems with my hardware. Haven't tried 6.0 yet.
I feel that there could be some rough waters ahead for the Linux community. Microsoft is out for one thing and that is death to the competition. They have never been interested in improving their own product, just killing the competition so that everyone has to use their stuff.

[danieldk]

Things are getting nasty now. Basically, Ballmer says that all other distributors have to line up now at Microsoft's cash drawer, or possibly get sued:

http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,2050848,00.asp

[bluesdog]

:frown:

If the GPL is being violated, should it not be possible to launch a class-action lawsuit against Novell?

I'd think some law firm would salivate at the idea of nailing MS with a hefty claim..

[deanlinkous]

Yep! I have numerous thoughts on this as well. None of them are good. I have posted my thoughts about this all over the internet, most dismiss me as a nut(I am actually). But no matter how you slice it, it is a sellout.

[danieldk]

http://technocrat.net/d/2006/11/2/9945
http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20061102175508403

Rough times ahead! First of all, people should do the opposite of what Novell expects: advise everybody to move away from SUSE Linux, SUSE Linux Enterprise Server, and SUSE Linux Enterprise Desktop. A community distro like Debian is safe ground, since the Debian project won't do odd stuff. Second, if you live in Europe or any other place where Novell, Microsoft, and co. are trying to push patents: actively rally against them. Sign petitions, show up at demonstrations, and be involved.

Oh, and considering Dave's comments: people should actively try to replace technologies and algorithms that are patented. Remember that there always is an old UNIX core that is tried & tested, and can't be patented because it is older than 15 years. I think (to add fuel to the fire ;)) that especially Mono et al. are dangerous. It's discomforting to see that the GNOME project integrates Mono technologies so rapidly.

[fos]

I have been worried about Linux since Novel took over Suse. Oracle is now moving in on RedHat. We all know what Bill and company does with everything they swallow up. I wonder how Ubuntu is going to fit in down the road?

I really like CentOS. Maybe I should stay with Debian and/or Slackware.

fos....

[morgoth]

I've had some further thoughts on all of this - call me a nutcase (and I'm sure many of you do think I am one, not that I really care).

1. Novell + Microsoft make deal. This indirectly threatens other Linux distributions. Many businesses will have to be "responsible" to their shareholders, and will have to choose Linux distributions that are "indemnified" - ie. Suse Linux of some sort. Other distributions may strike a 'covenant' with Microsoft and/or Novell on patents etc, in order to satisfy their shareholders. This will push the price of Linux up, making it much less competitive against Microsoft Windows. Novell will basically admit that certain parts of the Linux kernel, and other Linux related, GPL based software, infringes on Microsoft's software patents.

2. The reduction in non-covenant Linux distributions will be traumatic. It will only leave community based distributions, or smaller, non-free distributions. Both of these will have low cash flows, and will be ripe targets for legal action.

3. The FSF does not have the funds to mount counter legal challenges. IBM will NOT support it, IBM will see that it has Oracle, Microsoft, Novell, Sun-Microsystems, HP and Redhat against it (yes Redhat WILL turn to the darkside, they have to keep their shareholders happy as well). IBM will capitulate and move in with the covenant keepers. If the FSF does not have the financial funds to protect the GPL, there goes the majority of the software released under this license. Individuals and smaller coding communities will not have the funds, like the FSF to challenge legal action. Whils the GPL is perfectly legal, and perfectly sound, if you can't defend it, in a court of law, it's worthless.

4. With the GPL broken, Novell will assert action against the Linux kernel, for breaking copyrights/patents/trade secrets etc. Whilst the Linux kernel is basically the corporate bastard child now, it still has to maintain a thread of the FSF mantra, at least until the GPL is broken. We know Linus is not a friend of the GPL. We know that him, and all of the other key developers of the Linux kernel are now corporate shills. Yes, I use the word shill with malice. I detest Linus now after his anti-GPLv3 stance. It clearly confirms my thoughts that I made about the 2.6 kernel tree several times on the old Libranet forums.

5. Novell gets a free Unix like operating system that is in many ways, better than their old UNIX operating systems. Since most of the key developers are corporate shills, Novell is confident that it won't lose any key developers. Who will lose? You and me. We will clearly lose the freedoms that the FSF's GPL gave us. As to some others, who questioned legal action, only the copyright holder can take legal action, or their proxy. Individuals will not be able to afford to take legal action, and their expected proxy, the FSF will not be able to afford it either. Look at the SCO vs IBM case - 4 years, all FUD, costing probably upwards of 120 million dollars. The FSF does not have this type of money, and never will.

6. Now - many of you have mentioned Debian etc. You think Debian can survive? Don't kid yourself. Patent infringement. mmm - let's see. A DMCA take down notice, forcing the Debian website to shut down (including repositories). Microsoft will seek to stop Debian from continuing to develop, distributing src code etc that "supposedly infringes". Debian derivatives will not stand a chance. They are too heavily built on Debian and do not have the developer numbers to counterbalance this. If they start their own development process, Microsoft will repeat the Debian DMCA take down notice deal. This will kill the smaller and medium free and non-free distributions very quickly. Leaving, surprise, surprise, only the big corporate interests. Since Novell will by now control the Linux kernel development etc, and the GPL will have been legally invalidated due to the inability to protect itself legally in a court of law, the Linux kernel could easily be subverted to another more 'corporate friendly' software license. Even privatised to the point that it simply cannot be re-distributed etc as the current Linux kernel is.

Another point, that I'm thinking about, and yes, I am a conspirationlist, all it takes is for several large companies to argue that the Linux kernel is a national security threat. The government will say to the Linux kernel developers, "either introduce DRM'd backdoor kits that allow the NSA et al to spy on Linux distributions anywhere in the world, or we'll make the GPL, and Linux kernel, illegal and start locking people up". The government doesn't really want this, they simply want control. You don't believe that Microsoft Windows doesn't have a backdoor that allows full government access? You're kidding yourself. They want the same thing with Linux. Don't be surprised if it's already in there. Yes, already. And in breach of the GPL and everything that the FSF stands for. I mean, imagine if UNIX and Microsoft Windows have backdoors, but Linux doesn't. Could you imagine terrorists using Windows or UNIX? Nope, they'd all be going for the Linux kernel without the backdoors. Harder to get traced that way, eh? None of this would ever publically be released.

Every government likes control, and likes to hide things from the public eye. A true government is wholly open, every single decision is available to the public. And politicians are responsible for their decisions and actions. That does not happen. Furthermore, a true democracy means that every single law is passed by the public, by vote. If we consider this, then the US is certainly not a democracy. But then, by the same token, neither is Australia, the UK, or nearly every other country in the world. Think about that.

I give Linux, and the current distributions 5-10 years tops.

I've giving this sermon a great deal of thought and I believe time will prove me right. If you don't believe me, why has the US government taken almost no action against Sony for its DRM trojan, which clearly breaks a multitude of laws? Why was Microsoft not properly punished after the DOJ case? Why are software patents being more and more blatently pushed by the big corporations, and lovingly embraced by the US government, even though the proof is solid that they are bad for business? Think about it. It's all about control.

Think of me what you will, but deep down, I know many of you know that I'm right.

Here endeth the sermon.

Dave

[krp]

I view what has transpired as nothing but bad news. And to realize that it was Novell's CEO who *approached* M$ spells big time problems, to me anyway.

Once again it shows, at face value, that CEO's and public companies care only about their profit margin and their shareholders. They care nothing about their customers or, and as is the case of GNU/Linux, the developers or the community.

[morgoth]

Of course they don't care about you or me. Or the "community". All they care about is market share and profit. Oh, and "ownership".

I urge all kernel developers, especially, non "key" developers to release their kernel patches as GPL v3. If Linus and Andrew Morton will not accept these GPL v3 patches into the Linux kernel, then we definitely know what their motives are. Developers, don't capitulate, refuse to release kernel code as GPL v2 - irrespective of what Linus, and other key kernel developers say, release it as GPl v3. Existing contributors - re-assign your rights to force the GPL v3 license. You should trust RMS on this. Whilst I don't use Linux anymore, and have no plans to return to it due to a variety of personal and functional reasons, I'm still a solid advocate of the FSF and the GPL. I simply disagree with the direction that the key kernel developers are moving in, the increasing corporate interest in the Linux kernel, and the complete disregard for the FSF and GPL of which most of the key kernel developers are showing.

The GPL v2, whilst very good, cannot fight against software patents, nor can it protect against them. The GPL v3 must secede it in all honesty. I'm seeing a growing trend of pro BSD license supports bashing both the FSF and especially the GPL. Microsoft and other corporate interests (and probably politicians) are keen to get rid of the GPL. I mean, freedom for the people? No way. They want total control.

Dave

[fos]

I'm sorry to say that I can't find anything to disagree with in Morgoth's post.

Linux has become too successful for its own good. :(

fos....

[krp]

I urge all kernel developers, especially, non "key" developers to release their kernel patches as GPL v3.

Developers, don't capitulate, refuse to release kernel code as GPL v2 - irrespective of what Linus, and other key kernel developers say, release it as GPl v3. Existing contributors - re-assign your rights to force the GPL v3 license. You should trust RMS on this.

I agree completely.

Now, I have a question: Can, under the GPL, the kernel (2.4.x or 2.6.x) be forked and re-released under the GPL v3 when it becomes available?

It would seem to me that forking both major kernels and possibly having to do other modifications *might* be a way to usurp the grip of Linus, et al.

[morgoth]

Yes, it could be done. The entire kernel doesn't need to be GPL v3, although that would be highly desirable in my eyes. If some parts are GPL v3, and others GPL v2, then so be it. Linus CANNOT stop [ie. a fork] this from happening. The problem is, that most of the current code in the kernel is GPL v2. In order to fork it, and release it as GPL v3, you must have the copyright holder's permission(s). If they refuse to re-release it as GPL v3, you could still include it in a forked pro GPL v3 kernel tree, but this would be a moot thing to consider if only a small percentage of the forked kernel was GPL v3. You'd then have to get enough developers interested in developing it and maintaining it. You'd have to convince distributions to use it. You'd have to make it stable. Corporations would almost certainly deride it and attack it. So would Linus. It could not be called "Linux" due to trademark restrictions, Linus would almost certainly stop any forked kernel from being called "Linux". For most users of Linux, that do NOT care about FSF or its goals. They don't give a hoot about RMS and the GPL. They use it because it's inherently more stable and secure than alternative operating systems such as Microsoft Windows. That's it, period. They don't care about the politics. That's probably as high as 85% of ALL Linux users I'd estimate. Since, only a potential 15% of Linux users understand the political ramifications of the GPL et al, it leaves only a very small working population to use, distribute and maintain it.

Furthermore, you would see companies like Nvidia making changes to their licenes to forbid the useage of their closed binary sources with the forked Linux versions. With little driver support, and with it becoming harder to legally reverse engineer and develop drivers for hardware due to the DMCA and patents, any such forked kernel would not last long. Users will ONLY use it if they can do the work that they want to do, and have their hardware reasonably work with the kernel.

This is why things like the open source graphics card project are great. We need to create completely open hardware - motherboards, soundcards, video cards, network cards, etc etc that are wholly open, with no DRM, no restrictions etc. The open community would control the hardware, they'd be able to 100% write drivers to work with a forked Linux kernel etc. The only issue with this is:

1. The cost. It would be significantly higher in cost, due to a smaller manufacturing target.

2. The willingess of major manufacturing plants to actually make it. If there's not a big enough run, they won't touch it. We're talking probably 2 million units worldwide, minimum before they'd even look at it. And they'd like the money up front please.

3. Government legislation to stop it. The government wants the DMCA, and DRM, especially the US government which is driven by greedy corporate interest.

4. You'd have to have technical people capable of designing said hardware. Avoiding patents would be almost impossible. Avoiding legal action on said technical people taking 'trade secrets' from other projects with previous employers that they'd work for and using them to design open hardware would be difficult, to say the least. We'd get the big corporate hardware manufacturers taking action to stop said technical people from ever developing anything like this. I mean, they'd accuse them of infringing on their technology, patents, trade secrets etc. We come back to the old problem that individuals would not have the legal ability to fight corporate legal challenges.

It'd never happen.

Again, finally, we have the issue of governmental control. A totally open hardware system is not what the government wants, it cannot control it or track it.

Dave

[deanlinkous]

Well a bit out there but all in all I agree. Maybe abit over the top but I still agree. I recently have been disgusted by linux and have been thinking about what to do. I am the nut that always argues for a fork over at osnews. :)

I think gnewsense is a step in the right direction but overall I would like to see a new kernel be available for us GPL/FSF zealot nuts. One that I do not think is turning corporate.

I have always wondered why someone did not take a snapshot of the BSD kernel and stick it under the GPL so we will have a GPLv3 kernel.

I personally do not care that linux is being adopted and progressing and gaining features. I do not care if linux is popular or not. I use to think the devels felt that way but I think they got a taste of the green and now they just think they are not in it for the money. I used linux when it was a pain in the ass and didn't support half of anything and was still happy because of what it meant. Spending a few days getting everything setup or figuring out a workaround was the price I paid and did so gladly. I would like to have that feeling again. Maybe it is cool that linux has progressed and is now a alternative for a lot of users but where is my freedom kernel at, where is the freedom and the purity of it.

I am so sad.....and a nut....

[fos]

What about Gnu Hurd?

[fos]

Red Hat says open source and linux has won.....

http://www.redhat.com/promo/believe/


fos....

[deanlinkous]

What about Gnu Hurd?

It is very interesting and if they weren't so concerned about making it "perfect" or doing things the right way the first time then maybe they could get it moving along. It isn't overly usable and the pace of development is so slow I am not sure it ever will be.

I think if the hurd stopped switching kernels and settled down and got to work it would be awesome. I think RIGHT NOW would be the perfect time to send out a call for help and try and get some devels interested in it.

Dang it, now I am going to have to go download it and play with it again....if I can get it all going. :)

[deanlinkous]

Red Hat says open source and linux has won.....

http://www.redhat.com/promo/believe/


fos....

Well they have to put a good spin on it. And I do think this paints them in a prettier picture. I just hope RH doesn't suffer with all the recent news. RH is the ONLY company in the linux business I feel somewhat comfortable with...not too comfortable but a lot more comfy than any other.

[deanlinkous]

http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,2050848,00.asp?kc=EWEWEMNL103006EP17A

The distributors of other versions of Linux cannot assure their customers that Microsoft won't sue for patent infringement. "If a customer says, 'Look, do we have liability for the use of your patented work?' Essentially, If you're using non-SUSE Linux, then I'd say the answer is yes," Ballmer said.

"I suspect that [customers] will take that issue up with their distributor," Ballmer said. Or if customers are considering doing a direct download of a non-SUSE Linux version, "they'll think twice about that," he said.

[Lavene]

Although I see all the points made here, all valid and good, you seem to forget one major factor: the global Linux community. It's what have made Linux to what it is and there is no way in he** that it will fold and submit to the Redmond monster. And there are lots of ways to avoid the problems this whole thing might cause. The world is not just the US.
DMCA? Move to a country that does not have it (like Norway). It's already been suggested on some of the Debian mailing lists to move some stuff (I don't remember exactly what at the moment) to repos hosted by the Norwegian "Skolelinux". Software patents? Same thing. That's the great thing about a global movement; the physical location of stuff does not matter to the community. It does however dictate where the jurisdiction is.

Also, if Linus decides to sell out (I don't agree that he has done that already) or maintain his position on the GPL v3 someone will eventually fork the kernel or a bunch of developers will move over to RMS and the Hurd.

There is no coincidence that Microsoft has started a charm offensive at the same time as the news about MS/ Novell broke. Just check out the sickening press releases and blog posts about the change in the Vista EULA that gives the users right to reinstall the OS unlimited number of times. The MS community buys it and thinks it's a grand thing to do whereas the Linux community can't seem to stop laughing.

It's often said that one of the reasons Linux does not catch on among the masses is that it's very much a geek OS and luckily that is still true. And geeks will continue to do what geeks does best: do things their way.

Just my €0.02

Tina

[deanlinkous]

GREAT POINT!

As I stated on another forum a while back. "...with the DMCA as well as extreme copyright and trademarks stuff, the penguin will be a underground movement here"

Also the hosting company I use is located in Canada, wonder where they stand on all this crap?

[danieldk]

Dave, for now I don't agree, since there are a few things that could stop this scenario:

- swpats are still not legalized in the EU, and it seems that the current EP is not really interested in legalizing them. Besides that there are serious movements in the UK (non-FOSS) that are rallying to change IP laws, with an emphasis on community rather than assets.
- There is a fifteen year term for patents, save five years, and all technology from before 1986-1991 is safe. Remember that this includes FFS (the basis of all modern filesystems, including ext2/3), the TCP/IP stack, X11, Perl, Mach VM. Remember that in 1991 BSD was a damn good UNIX operating system. What we have added beyond then is mostly graphical fluff, extra languages, etc. Yeah, that would set back GNU/Linux on the desktop, but we'd have a beautiful (and light :)) UNIX system.
- If the GPL is invalidated, the FSF will make GPL-corrected, and ask people to relicense their stuff under GPL-corrected. Remember that a lot of free software programmers are free software fans, and will even be more after an attack of Microvell.
- For some software, it will be hard to find all contributors. BSD provides equivalents for most base libraries, utilities, and of course, the kernel. And since these are all under relaxed BSD terms, they can be relicensed under the GPL when new code is added.

So, yeah, there may be some setbacks in worse case scenarios. But, UNIX will not die, the community will not die, and free software will not die. Remember that we have had numerous attacks ever since the inception (AT&T vs. BSDi anyone?) of UNIX, and in the past it had a lot less contributors, less mindshare, and far les money.

As a postscript: I encourage everyone to become a member of the FSF. It will help us defenfing our principles. Put the money where your mouth is. Mine is with the FSF, not Microvell.

[danieldk]

BTW. I think that this scenario is more likely (especially after seeing Red Hat's optimism):

- Red Hat lawyers send a letter to Novell and Microsoft, demanding them to reveal what patents affect GNU/Linux. And if they do not do that they will sue both companies on slander.

In either case, the community wins. If we have a list of patents, they can be worked around, and the Microsoft mob threat disappears. If they don't, Red Hat will probably win the slander case, and this practically means Microsoft has no relevant patents to speak of.

- If a list of patents is released, there will probably be a freeze in GNU/Linux releases, while the community clears the source. Though, I wouldn't be surprised if the majority of patents affects Mono, and some Samba, WINE, and OO.org.

- We can happily move on without a patent threat from Microsoft. Novell will die. First of all, because it's reputation will be destroyed, everyone will see it as another failed SCO. Second, because Microsoft will end the convenant, and Novell's core Linux bussiness (Mono) will be full of Microsoft patents. With their Linux bussiness down, they will only have their other divisions, which haven't made a profit in years. They will slowly die, and Microsoft and Red Hat will pick up the Linux and identity management ashes.

[fos]

As usual, Daniel's wisdom is compelling.

I could happily work with only the command line, and I use vim or emacs 90% of the time. There is hope!

An earlier post suggested moving all software to Norway or a similar solution. Unfortunately, we can't all move to Norway (or even visit). :( Just using the patented software in the US would subject you to sanctions. We have a lot of lawyers (and politicians) here and they need to make money somehow.

fos....

[morgoth]

Daniel - a very quick reply, since it's 1.30am here and I'm dog tired.

1. Nearly all of the worlds commercial and proprietary software is US based and US owned. Europe would collapse if it was boycotted by US software and hardware firms. Whilst this might seem silly, I would not put it past the US government mandating such a thing. The US government cares about US business, and only US business. If it means stuffing around another country, it will. Imagine no IBM, HP, Compaq, Dell, Oracle, Microsoft, Apple products hitting Europe. Imagine those very companies refusing to support European countries. Sure, they could move to Linux, but that takes time to do. A long time, look at Munchen. The European economy would falter and die a long time before the US economy would.

2. Sure, Debian could move to Norway. And the US government would ban those websites from being available to US citizens, blocking them at the highest routing levels. A lot of countries now have federal trade agreements with the US, and they FULLY recognise the DMCA. Do you think Australia or the UK would take long to follow the US if asked? Nope.

3. As to the Linux kernel, imagine if Microsoft, Novell and many major hardware vendors sued the Linux kernel over patent infringements. All at the same time.

4. Europe? No patents? As much as I detest patents, they'll happen. One way or another, Europe will get them. The big corporate companies will keep pushing, and they'll eventually succeed. I'm not being pessimistic here, I'm being a realist. Optimism is nice, but too many people let false optimism blind them. Better to be a realist, and recognise the good AND the bad.

Dave

[morgoth]

I could happily work with only the command line, and I use vim or emacs 90% of the time. There is hope!

You could, probably 95% of Linux users couldn't and wouldn't. Computers have evolved from the 80s. They're now more multimedia machines than anything, and playing media from the command line isn't exactly enthralling. Most people use computers for media related enjoyment - watch a movie, listen to some music, surf the web, edit their digital images and so on. Doing that from a command line isn't enthralling to most users.

Dave

[danieldk]

I may be a bit of a UNIX traditionalist. But I still think that it is better to educate people than to give them brain-dead interfaces. It is like saying that books and papers will die, because people can't read anymore, and want everything spoon-fed from the television. Unfortunately this seems quite true, judging from ever-decreasing paper sales (at least in NL). Though that doesn't mean I have to support that :).

It is a general trend. E.g. voting machines are not transparant, though they are used everywhere because it takes less time to count votes. People seem to be willing to give up rights and control out of a form laziness.

Hacker nature goes against this. Hackers like to see what is inside, and how it works.

[fos]

The economy has evolved into a world economy. The US is in the war in Iraq due to the oil reserves in the region. The free flow of oil runs the world as it currently stands.

The US isn't about to cut off Europe or China because our economy would tank.

Big business is nothing new. Throughout history you have had those that have the marbles and make the rules and those that have to play the game.

No matter the system (mother nature, capitalism, communism, socialism, dictatorships, republics, & etc.), that is the way it will be. Survival of the fittest, the strong survive.

Sad but true.

fos....

[mdevour]

I may be a bit of a UNIX traditionalist. But I still think that it is better to educate people than to give them brain-dead interfaces. It is like saying that books and papers will die, because people can't read anymore, and want everything spoon-fed from the television.

I'd say it's more like saying "Books and papers won't die. You'll just have to copy them by hand."

Aren't analogies fun? :smiley14:

Mike D.

[benjaminq]

I just hope that the Novell bas**rds take the SCO road as soon as possible. I just wish I had some millions left to give to the FSF. Or some more to sue Novell over any GPL infringement they are about to commit.

This news sucks big time ...

[Lavene]

An earlier post suggested moving all software to Norway or a similar solution. Unfortunately, we can't all move to Norway (or even visit). :( Just using the patented software in the US would subject you to sanctions. We have a lot of lawyers (and politicians) here and they need to make money somehow.

fos....

Hehe... we dosn't have room for all of you either :)

But are you saying that merely using a patent could get you sued? But that's not how patents are supposed to work. A patent is aimed at people wanting to distribute the patented stuff, not the end users. So if I passed on a piece of software to you it's I that breach the patent... not you.

And that's the point. If someone put up a repository in Norway (or wherever) that contained software that was legal here but patented in the US that person would be the offender, not the americans downloading it. The trick lies in not activly push the software in the US. Granted, the patent holder would request that the server was closed down but he would have no jurisdiction. And in Norway there would be taken no action what so ever simply because it's perfectly legal here.

As a matter of fact it happens frequently that the US embassy requests stuff that's illegal in the US is taken off line... adult sites, gambling etc. But I have yet to hear about that actually happen. Heck, they even demanded that we lowered the tax on American cars because the current taxes invites people to by small european, japanese or korean cars. Which of course was the entire idea with the differentiated taxes. Smaller cars, less gas consumtion and hench less pollution. They asked, they threatened to stop byuing fish but no one really cared.

Our economy is strong, our products is in demand (oil, gas, fish and technology) and the US is not at all our biggest market. The US simply is in no position to threaten most of Europe because we just don't depend on them.

Tina

[AndreL]

6. Now - many of you have mentioned Debian etc. You think Debian can survive? Don't kid yourself. Patent infringement. mmm - let's see. A DMCA take down notice, forcing the Debian website to shut down (including repositories).They'll be more repositories opening... (some in countries where the DCMA doesn't have jurisdiction). We'll distribute through the "Bit Torrent" network...

Microsoft will seek to stop Debian from continuing to develop, distributing src code etc that "supposedly infringes".Debian is not a corporation that one can sue or shutdown... It's just a name. A non-lucrative organisation... The servers are just a "central point" to get the whole movement organized in a simpler way. Who will they go against? The thousands of developpers spreaded worldwide... individually? And if they ever achieve in shuting down the website... We'll just move the content somewhere else also...

By the time they can pin down every developpers throughout the World, shut down the foreign Websites, kill the Torrent Network, kill Usenet, etc. etc. (if ever they want to go through this) we'll have move quite far from their "proootected" codes. :)

They better run...
.
.

[AndreL]

It's often said that one of the reasons Linux does not catch on among the masses is that it's very much a geek OS and luckily that is still true. And geeks will continue to do what geeks does best: do things their way.

Just my €0.02

Tina
Aaaaaaaaaaaaaamen!

[AndreL]

by: Ian Murdock (the "ian" in Debian)
Debian founder

First of all (and this is the obvious part), Debian is a non-commercial, community project, which means it isn't owned or controlled by a commercial interest. As such, Debian is an embodiment of what made Linux what it is today: openness, vendor neutrality, and community. It's a reminder of where we all came from. It keeps the industry honest. Or, in the words of IBM and HP executives (http://www.linux-mag.com/2002-03/debian_01.html), it's "the core of the Linux community" and a vendor-neutral "arbiter ... to make sure everybody plays nice." Sure, Debian isn't entirely unique in this respect (there are, after all, other community distros, most notably Slackware and Gentoo). However, combined with its popularity, Debian's "non-commercial, community project" status makes it a force to be reckoned with. In other words, Debian may not be the only global player, and it may not be the only non-commercial, community project, but it's the only global player that's also a non-commercial, community project.

Second, Debian is less an operating system and more a collection of compatible software. (Note the word compatible -- that will be important later.) Red Hat, SUSE, and the other distros are much more like traditional operating systems: monolithic, vertically integrated, one-size-fits-all products. Because Debian is modular by design (it had to be, or it wouldn't have been possible to subdivide the work among many distributed developers), it's an excellent foundation for "value-added" Linux distros, and we've seen numerous of these distros emerge over the years: Corel, Stormix, Progeny (http://www.progeny.com/), Linspire (http://www.linspire.com/), Xandros (http://www.xandros.com/), Knoppix (http://www.knopper.net/knoppix/), LinEx (http://www.linex.org/), Skolelinux (http://www.skolelinux.org/portal/), MEPIS (http://www.mepis.org/), and Ubuntu (http://www.ubuntu.com/), to name but a few. In fact, it's safe to say the vast majority of all distributions today are derived either from Debian or from Red Hat, and because the Red Hat derivatives have long ago splintered into many (http://www.caldera.com/) different (http://www.mandriva.com/) and (http://www.redhat.com/) incompatible (http://www.suse.com/) varieties (http://www.turbolinux.com/), it's also safe to say Debian is truly unique among distros not because it's the basis of so many derivatives, but because those derivatives are, after all these years, still compatible with each other.

http://ianmurdock.com/?p=239
.
.

[fos]

Hi Tina,

I was trying to convey the message that the US CAN'T screw Europe and China because OUR economy depends on the trade and financial status that we have with you, not the other way around. Unfortunately, the US has become a debtor nation. :(

fos....

[fos]

Individuals using patented material without the proper license can and have been sued in the US.

For example: My school won't allow me to install open source chess software on my classroom computers. I have one copy of an obsolete commercial version than is no longer available. The techs will not install but one copy on one computer. Schools have been sued by Microsoft and others for having unlicensed patented software on computers used for educational use.

That may not be how patents are supposed to work but in the US anyone can be sued by any of the multitude of lawyers that wants to take the time to file a computer generated form with the courts. This is the most litigious society in the world.

fos...

[AndreL]

[We] promise that we won't assert our patents against individual, non-commercial, open source developers,” commented Microsoft’s general counsel Brad Smith.

“Who are these? These are individuals who are creating code, contributing code, they're not being paid for that code, they're often working in the evenings or at home. They're not creating it as part of their job, but they're acting in an individual non-commercial way. The promise doesn't run to anybody who employs them, because after all, they're not acting in the course of their employment.”

from:
Novell and Microsoft: intellectual property bridge or innovation tax?
November 03, 2006

http://www.businessreviewonline.com/os/archives/2006/11/novell_and_micr.html
.
.

[krp]

I'm just wondering if there is some sort of tie-in between MS/Novell and, I believe, Sun (last year maybe?), pertaining to OOo and some kind of purported 'covenent'?

Does anybody recall the Sun OOo details?

[AndreL]

GREAT POINT!

As I stated on another forum a while back. "...with the DMCA as well as extreme copyright and trademarks stuff, the penguin will be a underground movement here"

Also the hosting company I use is located in Canada, wonder where they stand on all this crap?

We won against the DMCA and for Bit Torrent (Isohunt)... few years ago!
They can try again!

[danieldk]

I'm just wondering if there is some sort of tie-in between MS/Novell and, I believe, Sun (last year maybe?), pertaining to OOo and some kind of purported 'covenent'?

Does anybody recall the Sun OOo details?

To be honest. I think that Sun may take protective measures, but they won't engage in an OSS IP war to soon. They are just recovering from bad years. Besides that, in contrast to what many others think, I guess that they got the FOSS message to some extend.

Remember that they are one of the largest OSS contributors besides Red Hat. E.g. they gave us OO.org, OpenSolaris, within a few months open Java. Besides that they have invested a lot in GNOME. At the moment they are pretty good guys, and mostly making a buck out of hardware and support. So, it is not really in their interest to start an softwaer IP war. Just like it is not useful to Dell.

[Leon]

Novell is only demonstrating consistency.

Novell bought DR-DOS and Word Perfect.

[AndreL]

Morgoth's scenario may come true but...

Maybe RedHat is right: Linux Won!

Microsoft has probably realised that the "Windows" development model is outpaced. That Linux and OSS are much better schemes for the new century. They still struggle with "Windows Vista" and it will probably be full of holes, again, as all previous Windows. They know that the OS is going down, mostly in the server market, and they want their share of it. I think we may see the same fork that was there few years ago when they had Win98 for consumers and Win2000 for corporations. Now they'll eventually have MS-Windows (Vista) for consumers and MS-Linux for the corporate clients. With Windows loosing support, slowly, along the years.

That doesn't mean that Microsoft will change its business practice. Yes, they will try to crush any competition. (RedHat, probbaly). I don't believe that they will go after "users oriented" or "niched" distros like Gentoo, Slackware, Mepis, Ubuntu or Linspire and the likes. (well, you know what I mean... if my choices here wasn't that great). Not for quite a while anyway.

I don't believe that they will try to "kill" Linux... they may try like hell to "proprietarize" it, tho... Like they did with the Open Document format. They just can't say "well, cool, lets do it" they have to come with their own proprietary "OpenDocument" format... Well, they say what they want but they'll never convince me that if I have to pay a third party corporation to have access to my work (open-xml in MSWord) it is an open format.

Actually, the FSF should register "open" as a trademark so proprietary software corporations coudn't use it. :tongue:

Finally, MS coming into the Linux business (even through the back door, for now) may have some good: hardware makers will develop better drivers for Linux...

[deanlinkous]

http://geekblog.oneandoneis2.org/index.php/2006/11/03/ms_aamp_novell_the_opposite_of_what_you

[AndreL]

http://geekblog.oneandoneis2.org/index.php/2006/11/03/ms_aamp_novell_the_opposite_of_what_you

I couldn't have said it better...

And, I must admit: they do some quite good hardware.

Thanks for the link.

[bluesdog]

Walkies?

Novell, which has never recovered from the decline of its NetWare networking operating system, may be given a new leash on life with this announcement, noted Morochove.:smiley4:

http://www.echannelline.com/usa/story.cfm?item=21362