Metroid
05-16-2007, 09:57 AM
Linus Torvalds takes issue with Microsoft's claims of patent infringement
In its most recent bout with Linux and the open-source community, Microsoft claimed that Linux distributions, along with other open-source software, actually infringe on its patents. The Redmond giant claimed that 235 of its patents have been violated by the Linux kernel, Linux graphical user interface and Open Office/other open-source applications. The company went on to say that it believes it has the right to demand royalties from Linux distributions.
Despite Microsoft taking a strong stance on its argument, Linus Torvalds, lead developer of the Linux kernel, failed to blink. Talking to InformationWeek, Torvalds simply said, "It's certainly a lot more likely that Microsoft violates patents than Linux does. If the source code for Windows could be subjected to the same critical review that Linux has been, Microsoft would find itself in violation of patents held by other companies."
Torvalds went on to reason that although "fundamental patents" for basic operating series were already filed in the 1960s, the protection for those patents have been expired for quite some time. He also suggested that Microsoft name the patents that it believes are being violated in order for its claims to actually be tested in court.
"Naming them would make it either clear that Linux isn't infringing at all (which is quite possible, especially if the patents are bad), or would make it possible to avoid infringing by coding around whatever silly thing they claim."
Source (http://www.dailytech.com/Linus+Torvalds+Responds+to+Microsofts+Patent+Claim s/article7305.htm)
Linux was a great project mainly done for an open source community and I really like these people that try to help the freedom.
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
Linux "infringes 283 patents, not 228".
LINUX POTENTIALLY INFRINGES 283 untested patents, but none of them has been court-validated, said the author of the report quoted by Microsoft's Steve Ballmer.
Dan Ravicher, author of the Open Source Risk Management (OSRM) study Ballmer quoted, and executive director of the Public Patent Foundation, added that it's not unusual for any piece of software to infringe a shedload of patents and that the whole affair is 'boring'. And when a lawyer tells you something is boring, you can guarantee dropping off within seconds.
"As the SCO saga shows, filing a case based on an allegation is one thing, proving the merits of the allegation in court is something completely different," Ravicher told eWeek. "[Ballmer] misconstrues the point of the OSRM study, which found that Linux potentially, not definitely, infringes 283 untested patents, while not infringing a single court-validated patent.
"The point of the study was actually to eliminate the FUD about Linux's alleged legal problems by attaching a quantifiable measure versus the speculation," he said. "And the number we found, to anyone familiar with this issue, is so average as to be boring; almost any piece of software potentially infringes at least that many patents."
Linus Torvalds' Open Source Development Laboratory has set up a legal fighting fund of $10 million to use should Microsoft roll out its legal rottweilers. $10 million should be just about enough to see them through at least the first month of legalling. How the open saucers plan to fund the inevitable five to ten years of subsequent legal activity remains to be seen.
Source (http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=39663)
Kind funny so how could we really know if that is true meaning that Microsoft has its own software source closed.
Should they open the source code for it?
I think that will never happen so I think they are just being elementary schooling children.
In its most recent bout with Linux and the open-source community, Microsoft claimed that Linux distributions, along with other open-source software, actually infringe on its patents. The Redmond giant claimed that 235 of its patents have been violated by the Linux kernel, Linux graphical user interface and Open Office/other open-source applications. The company went on to say that it believes it has the right to demand royalties from Linux distributions.
Despite Microsoft taking a strong stance on its argument, Linus Torvalds, lead developer of the Linux kernel, failed to blink. Talking to InformationWeek, Torvalds simply said, "It's certainly a lot more likely that Microsoft violates patents than Linux does. If the source code for Windows could be subjected to the same critical review that Linux has been, Microsoft would find itself in violation of patents held by other companies."
Torvalds went on to reason that although "fundamental patents" for basic operating series were already filed in the 1960s, the protection for those patents have been expired for quite some time. He also suggested that Microsoft name the patents that it believes are being violated in order for its claims to actually be tested in court.
"Naming them would make it either clear that Linux isn't infringing at all (which is quite possible, especially if the patents are bad), or would make it possible to avoid infringing by coding around whatever silly thing they claim."
Source (http://www.dailytech.com/Linus+Torvalds+Responds+to+Microsofts+Patent+Claim s/article7305.htm)
Linux was a great project mainly done for an open source community and I really like these people that try to help the freedom.
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
Linux "infringes 283 patents, not 228".
LINUX POTENTIALLY INFRINGES 283 untested patents, but none of them has been court-validated, said the author of the report quoted by Microsoft's Steve Ballmer.
Dan Ravicher, author of the Open Source Risk Management (OSRM) study Ballmer quoted, and executive director of the Public Patent Foundation, added that it's not unusual for any piece of software to infringe a shedload of patents and that the whole affair is 'boring'. And when a lawyer tells you something is boring, you can guarantee dropping off within seconds.
"As the SCO saga shows, filing a case based on an allegation is one thing, proving the merits of the allegation in court is something completely different," Ravicher told eWeek. "[Ballmer] misconstrues the point of the OSRM study, which found that Linux potentially, not definitely, infringes 283 untested patents, while not infringing a single court-validated patent.
"The point of the study was actually to eliminate the FUD about Linux's alleged legal problems by attaching a quantifiable measure versus the speculation," he said. "And the number we found, to anyone familiar with this issue, is so average as to be boring; almost any piece of software potentially infringes at least that many patents."
Linus Torvalds' Open Source Development Laboratory has set up a legal fighting fund of $10 million to use should Microsoft roll out its legal rottweilers. $10 million should be just about enough to see them through at least the first month of legalling. How the open saucers plan to fund the inevitable five to ten years of subsequent legal activity remains to be seen.
Source (http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=39663)
Kind funny so how could we really know if that is true meaning that Microsoft has its own software source closed.
Should they open the source code for it?
I think that will never happen so I think they are just being elementary schooling children.