[Luna] Microsoft blesses SuSE, with potentially ominous overtones for other distros

[Andrew Roazen]

Embrace, extend, extinguish.

"The patent agreement/protection agreement will only apply between SuSE 
Linux and Microsoft" - Ballmer
http://www.osnews.com/story.php/16378/Microsoft-Novell-Ink-Linux-Deal

A poster in this forum claims that Red Hat holds a 90% share in the 
server market and Novell is just partnering with MS to improve their 
share. Others think it's a gambit to make Mono/.NET an OpenJava-killer.

The concern here is that all Novell has really done is buy protection 
from IP lawsuits from MS, leaving other distributions potentially 
vulnerable now that the SCO gambit failed. The FUD over "Don't buy 
Linux" is now "Don't buy anything but SuSE."

Particularly troubling is this bit of language from Novell's FAQ:
> Q. The press release indicates Microsoft is also pledging not to 
> assert its patents against *individual, non-commercial* open source 
> developers. How is this connected to Novell?
>
> Microsoft and Novell felt it was important to establish a precedent 
> for the *individual, non-commercial* open source developer community 
> that potential patent litigation need not be a concern. Microsoft is 
> excited to more actively participate in the open source community and 
> Novell is and will continue to be an important enabler for this 
> bridge. For these reasons, both Novell and Microsoft felt it was 
> appropriate to make this pledge for Microsoft not to assert its 
> patents against the non-commercial community.
In essence, the guy who develops a utility like Audacity is off the 
hook, but employed open source developers could see themselves in trouble.

Eben Moglen of the EFF legal team believes this arrangement (MS 
distributing SuSE) violates section 7 of the GPLv2:
http://news.com.com/2061-10795_3-6132156.html
(preamble: /Finally, any free program is threatened constantly by 
software patents. We wish to avoid the danger that redistributors of a 
free program will individually obtain patent licenses, in effect making 
the program proprietary. To prevent this, we have made it clear that any 
patent must be licensed for everyone's free use or not licensed at all.)/

Bruce Perens is particularly foaming at the mouth:
http://technocrat.net/d/2006/11/2/9945


-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Andrew Roazen, Application Systems Analyst
| Cline Library, Northern Arizona University
| ? 928.523.6764 vCard <http://www2.nau.edu/%7Ear24/aroazen.vcf>

The opinions expressed are those of the guy who sits at this desk, not 
his employers.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.flaglug.org/pipermail/luna/attachments/20061103/81f2c7ca/attachment.html