Microsoft to seek royalties from open-source software distributors & users

#21

Thanks for the links!

#22

I can think of at least 2 violations of MS patent and those are of the file formats in OpenOffice. MS does not when last i checked allow anyone that doesn’t have Office installed to write Office file format only reading is permitted. So basically why use OpenOffice if you need a Office license to write thier file formats.

Most other file formats like *.PSD are basically open technology, but if you wrote a program that changed the *.PSD file format you can damn well expect Adobe to sue so fast your head would spin.

Lastly the reason the SCO lawsuits were such a bad idea is cause SCO doesn’t even know what patents it holds and when it went to court they realized they didn’t own them.

Patents are valid in my opinion but it has gotten a little out of control. The problem most ppl have with patents is that ppl don’t see none physical technologies as something that someone can own. Think about Music, Games, Movies and ART in general. Everyone hear should appreciate that their work get paid by the selling of these none physical objects.

We need a new way of thinking about these non physical entities and let patents be patents and let this new methodology be sololy for none physical concepts and materials such as Music, Games, Stories, Art of any form.

Let’s not forget big businesses still play pretty fair once in a while, look at AMD and Intel, rather than getting into patent wars with each other they agree to compete and share technology yet still creating patents. It more a bag of honour to get the other guy to admit your idea was better.

My 2 cents sorry if i offend anyone.

#23

We got a response here. Source is Neowin.net.

Executive Director of the Linux Foundation, Jim Zemlin, has chosen his words carefully when asked what the thinks of Microsoft declaring that 235 of its patents are violated in some form of open source code. He notes that a critical review of Windows code would show that it can be claimed to violate other vendors’ patents as well. “If you use Windows, Solaris, [IBM’s] AIX or any similar operating system, you have the same patent infringement risk as using Linux. Microsoft should be careful of what it starts because it doesn’t know where it will end. Who are they going to sue? Companies will not continue to do business with suppliers who sue them,” said Zemlin.

Zemlin noted that Microsoft continues to decline to name the patents allegedly violated, which would let knowledgeable opinion to assess its claims. The software giant also may have never tested its patents in court. “Claiming violations of untested patents is a lot different from claiming violations of court tested patents. Look at SCO or any other patent troll out there. It’s nutty to think you can sue your customers and keep their business,” he notes. Zemlin believes the Microsoft statements are meant to preserve Microsoft’s Windows and Office desktop monopolies, “the greatest cash cow ever created”. By keeping as many people as possible for considering alternatives, Microsoft is protecting a business that yields $1.5 billion a day to its coffers, Zemlin says.

#24

On my first computer, Windows came with Word and Notepad. It functioned how I wanted. Things like Excel were the premium. It had basic spellcheck, basic grammar check. No biggies. I didn’t want super premium deluxe. On my second computer, it came with a free nuetered version of Office. I could deal with the reminders of what the premium could do. But I’m NOT spending money on a word processor, and I was happy. I rarely used the program and so forth. My current computer came with a 30 day trial of office with an upgrade option of $399. Now keep in mind, while I may not use Word all the time, it was a program I liked having around. But my stance remained the same. I am NOT paying for a word processor.

That’s when I found OpenOffice. It may not be as super deluxe as Office XP 2007 but it’s also not $499. If they want my business on their applications, they should make it cheaper than starter computers. Especially on a frickin word processor. I chose to go with OpenOffice because the same price as their word processor, that’s damn near a Direct X 10 video card. I wonder which one is going to be used more?

#25

Wow, I have tried to swithch to linux a couple of times. Found it just difficult enough to keep me in MS land. Comforted by the fact that I still had a choice. Looks like I will be forced to excercise that choice now, while I still can. I don’t think I will be paying Microsoft anything. Ever.

#26

Wasn’t the first Windows based on some MacOS? Microsoft better not start a war or they will get backfired :stuck_out_tongue:

#27

And the Mac Os is based on the Xerox Alto experimental computer.
IMAGE
History of the graphical user interface - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

#28

Because a large chunk of information being generated is being stored in these formats. Should my Linux computer not be able to read a word processor document that my wife saved for me from her Windows machine? Should I not be able to read or print government forms from my Linux box because they are stored in PDF files? The reason Linux programs are written to work with these formats is for compatibility with the rest of the world.

Well, the open source community actuallty does come up with its own, often-better, open formats that open source and closed source applications can use. Instead of PDF we have PS and TeX. Instead of DOC we have ODF. Instead of AVI and MOV we have Ogg, Theora, and MKV (Matroska). Instead of MP3 we have Ogg Vorbis. Instead of JPG and GIF we have PNG. Instead of Adobe Illustrator files (AI) we have SVG.

So the Open Source community is innovating, doing their own thing, and creating their own formats. But to interact with the bulk of the information out there, open source apps need to support the common formats as well.

Cheers,
Michael Duffy

#29

Unfortunately this isn’t true. Ideas are very patentable. You don’t even have to implement the idea, just show that it could be implemented. I’ve heard that IBM owns the patent for using a laser to perform eye surgery. They only had to show that you could use a laser to perform surgery on an eye. They didn’t have to show that using a laser would actually make your eye better in order to get the patent. Now every laser invented for Lasik has to be licensed from IBM.

The problem with patents these days is that they haven’t been following the guidelines established for them, that they should be novel and non-obvious. These criteria are being judged by lawyers/engineers who are not experts in the fields that they are approving patents for, and therefor are not the best judge of what is non-obvious. Recent court rulings have shown that once you own a patent, it is very hard to get the patent thrown out, even if it shouldn’t have been approved. The courts are protecting the patent holders rights.

Microsoft would be unwise to sue a lot of the people who are infringing on their patents because then other companies will not want to do business with them. It is just not a good business practice.

#30

Wrong thinking if they are better they don’t need to be compatible to any bulk shit propietary format software out there, since people would use theirs instead and their format and use their format for exchanging! At the moment it does not seem to be the case otherwise the majority would not choose to go for the non-open-source solution.

#31

But in practice, you do need to support the common formats. People in general won’t choose what formats are best, they will choose what is easiest. When my wife saves a word processor document, she is just going to hit the “save” button. She isn’t going to make sure the ODF plugin has been installed and then choose ODF from a format dropdown list every time she saves a document. And when she needs me to read a document she has written, she doesn’t want to be bothered with opening an application to convert it to a format that is an open, wider-supported standard. She just wants to throw the file in an email and send it to me.

And Microsoft isn’t going to add ODF support by default to MSWord, nor make you able to set it as the default save format whenver you hit the “save” button. That would threaten their market share and platform/applilcation lock-in that they work hard to sustain. Microsoft has little interest in being compatible with other software packages because that threatens their market position.

Open source software on the other hand has little interest in being incompatible with other software packages, because that hinders application adoption and goes against the base FOSS phillosophies anyways. The more compatible applications are with one another, the more freedom the user has to choose the application that they like the best, and the more we all win in the long run.

Cheers,
Michael Duffy

#32

From what I understand many drivers, server applications (The Apache HTTP Server Project & the PHP Scripting Language to name two) and that web browser we all know Firefox are Open Source.

The potential side effect of Microsofts draconian tactics would be far worse than the loss of Open Office. It would mean that we would all HAVE to use their applications and technology to function.

… and pay a fee to Microsoft for things we take for granted now.

That would be horrible.

#33

I’m just about to patent the wheel.
So everyone who has car, or bike, etc. has to pay me to use it!

Als

#34

This is exactly why most governments are moving to PDF rather than DOC files. PDF is managed by Adobe but that only means to implement the read/write functionality is only restricted by the proper use of it (simply put, don’t F**k with the format but you are more than welcome to use it).
MS realized early on that once Office was entrenched into most offices it works best not to allow anyone to create the file without using their own code which of course requires an Office license. Allowing anyone to read the file with their free reading also worked for them cause then anyone could read the file without an Office license.

#35

That’s not gonna happen. In these case we would ALL drop them forever, and never ever use any microsoft product again. If we ALL refused what would they do?
But that’s not gonna happen so do not worry.
This is all just mafia tactics, to scare big bosses away from linux, so they would choose to stick to windows for “security” reasons.

Just remember [b]Microsoft & Linux Joining forces ?

[/b]http://forums.cgsociety.org/showthread.php?f=59&t=424673&highlight=novell

I don’t think I will be buying Vista anytime soon either. Plus in UK it costs almost double?!?

Als

#36

If this would for some reason go through, wouldn’t it give Microsoft a de facto monopoly?

After all, any operating system that isn’t produced by Microsoft would be infringing copyright and therefore illegal.

#37

We are talking about linux only right? Not about the graphical interface, the X11 system, KDE, gnome etc?

I don’t think Linux is copying Microsoft. The evidence is this: Linux is stable.

And how is Linux copying Microsoft??? I thought Linux was a ‘copy’ of Unix.

Besides, the structure of Windows compared to that of Linux is sooooooooo different.

Linux and prequel variants of it like Xinu and Minix were available before Windows 3.1.

Wasn’t Windows NT a copy of VMS?
HP did loose a courtroom battle against Microsoft because MS copied the look and feel of their windows system on the Macintosh. You can’t patent or own ‘Look and feel’ was the judges verdict. So all office like programs are cleared in any case.

So you have Microsoft now assuming the role HP had way back then. The hypocrites.
Why wouldn’t I buy a Vista license? Because I would need a Cray super computer to run it on. That thing is the emperor of resource hogs! And I need my precious resources when running my fluid sim in Blender (oops! Another open source app :eek: ). Besides if I’m not mistaken , Linux can address 4 Gb ram whereas Windows can only address 2 Gb ram.

And why would Linux copy from MS? MS acts as they have precious magic code in their OS. What is an OS any way? A way for the users to run their program on and to communicate (via the HAL/ driver) with the hardware. The last part I think the hardware manufactureres are a little anal rettentive. We need those precious datasheets to drivers for. Bah! Win modems YUCK! MS is enjoying unsurpassed hardware support, which cannot be said for Linux. So if Linux has copied MS, there surely had been some signs of it.

The idea behind of every new OS at MS in my perception is: Bells and whistles first, stability last.

That’s my 2 cents.

#38

Office suites don’t necessary has to be similar just because they offer similar function, Office 2k7 is a perfect demonstration: they decided not to add another 100 buttons that nobody use, they just radically changed the way a user access to them in order to be able to use them all and be more productive. That is something I call innovation, and I won’t be surprise if the next version of OO will have similar gui.

About Gimp/Photoshop, you saying that os software is not innovative/usable enough to compete with commercial software? Photoshop is far from being a perfect software, it’s just a best out there, so why Gimp is not trying to innovate where Photoshop lacks?

But Linux also has a LOT of software that is unique and original. Scripting language support is unrivaled in Linux, Unix, and BSD. Command line tools are much better than in the Windows world, and make navigation and automation much easier and faster. Security and permissions are more robust and stable. Many server-side applications were pioneered on Unix, Linux, and BSD.

I agree, I’ve used Slack/Ubuntu for a while and command line was very powerful, but you have to agree that is not something a desktop user care too much. I would prefer more some decent gpu accelerated desktop but it seems that Beryl team is too busy doing useless desktop effects that nobody use rather than develop a fully programmable accelerated desktop like Vista’s WPF/XAML and future Leopard’s Core Animation (it’s not about eye-candy, but about totally programmable gui that allow developers to create more usable software).

There is plenty of innovation in the Open Source community. There is plenty of copying too. Same can be said of closed source software as well. But building off of other people’s ideas and not re-inventing the wheel each time is how science, literature, software, and other industries move forward overall, instead of doing the same thing over and over and never going anywhere.

Cheers,
Michael Duffy

Indeed, when someone take an idea and enhance it it’s ok for me (it’s more than “ok”), but more often I see taking an idea without much improving.

p.s.: I avoid to reply to people who has moved personal offense just because they don’t share my thoughts about software. Jesus, get a life.

p.s.s.: It’s surprise how some people blame MS for the lack of innovation and in the same time has no idea that some of the modern “cool” technologies were introduced by MS (like Gadgets with RSS support, that were already in Win98 known as “Active Desktop Items”, or desktop searching that is already present on every XP machine and allow user to search through some kind of documents). Sure, what we have today is much much better, but it’s called evolution/progress.

#39

Oh I’m definately not holding up Gimp as an example of stunning open source innovation. :slight_smile: Much of Gimp is indeed a copy of Photoshop. Some of it is not. The Gimp team is innovating in some of its rewriting for the next version (GEGL infrastructure), and the scripting system seems more flexible than Photoshop actions. But until the Gimp core is rewritten a bit more, there probably won’t be any easily visible innovation.

Gimp hasn’t been developed as much as Photoshop in some areas I feel are very important. Gimp is certaintly useable (I use it instead of PS since I’m on Linux), but Photoshop is certainly ahead of it in useablilty and workflow. It’s not the method of development that makes Gimp trail Photoshop in functionality (open vs closed source), it is simply the amount of development that has been put into it (Photoshop has been around longer and has more man-hours of development put into it).

I’m on Linux. Photoshop is not available on Linux. So the entire “can or cannot compete” argument is largely moot because Photoshop isn’t even an option for me. Gimp, Krita, and Pixel are competition under Linux. Again, I would love for Adobe to bring Photoshop to Linux because I’d buy a copy.

This is a good policy, and I hope none of my responses have been interpreted as personal offenses. It is best to debate the ideas, not attack the people who expressed them.

Cheers,
Michael Duffy

#40

Thanks for the links. As a newbie to open source software I learned a lot from this thread.

A company that sues competitors for patent infringement is like a defender who has been beaten so thoroughly that he turns to plead with the referee. You don’t do that if you can still reach the ball, even if you genuinely believe you’ve been fouled. - paulgraham.com