Text 7910, 199 rader
Skriven 2006-11-11 09:31:06 av Robert Wolfe (1:261/1)
Ärende: A five year deal with Microsoft to dump Novell/SUSE 
============================================================
 
A five year deal with Microsoft to dump Novell/SUSE  By Nicholas Petreley 
Created 2006-11-08 16:58 


Wake up little SUSE, Wake up. No, that's not good enough. Wake up SUSE
customers, wake up. Novell is jeopardizing the future of Linux for its own
short-term rewards. If you want to see Linux flourish, let alone survive after
Novell's five year deal with Microsoft expires, I suggest we make an
alternative five year deal with Microsoft. In this case, our part of the deal
is to spend the next five minutes, months, or years migrating away from every
shred of Novell/SUSE software in our home, office, or enterprise. 

The controversial agreement between Microsoft and Novell stinks to high heaven.
Look, for example, at the contradictory statements. 

Take this quote from the Novell FAQ on the agreement [1]:

Novell makes no admission that its Linux and open source offerings infringe on
any other parties' patents.

How does that jibe with the following quote from Microsoft General Counsel Brad
Smith?
"We addressed the proprietary issues through the net up-front payment. The
open-source we addressed through the percentage of revenue."

The "percentage of revenue" to which Brad Smith is referring is Novell's
payment to Microsoft so that Microsoft will not sue SUSE customers for patent
infringement. 

Wait. Didn't we just read that no such infringements exist? If Novell is paying
Microsoft a percentage of its revenue from sales of SUSE Linux as part of a
covenant from Microsoft not to sue SUSE customers for patent infringement in
open source code, then is this not a tacit admission that Novell's Linux and
open source offerings infringe on other parties' patents, particularly
Microsoft's patents? How can one interpret this any other way? Why would Novell
pay Microsoft not to sue its customers over patent infrigements Novell says do
not exist? 

I see only two explanations for this apparent contradiction, neither of them
good. 

1. There are no Microsoft patent infringements in Linux and/or SUSE open source
products. Novell is simply attempting to spread Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt
(FUD) about other distributions. It doesn't matter if there is no possibility
Microsoft can sue Red Hat customers or any other Linux customers. Novell can
say they have an exclusive deal that protects its customers from a Microsoft
lawsuit, which gives it the pyschological upper hand. The implication is that
if you buy a non-SUSE distribution, you could get sued. Perception has always
mattered more than facts. 

2. There are Microsoft patent infringements in Linux and/or SUSE open source
products. Novell is simply refusing to admit it in the quote from the FAQ
above. 

The deal and the GPL

Furthermore, if Novell is obliged to pay Microsoft a percentage of its revenue
from Linux in order to prevent Microsoft from suing its customers based on
patent infringements, how does this fail to break section 7 of the GPL? 

From section 7 of the GPL:

If, as a consequence of a court judgment or allegation of patent infringement
or for any other reason (not limited to patent issues), conditions are imposed
on you (whether by court order, agreement or otherwise) that contradict the
conditions of this License, they do not excuse you from the conditions of this
License. If you cannot distribute so as to satisfy simultaneously your
obligations under this License and any other pertinent obligations, then as a
consequence you may not distribute the Program at all. For example, if a patent
license would not permit royalty-free redistribution of the Program by all
those who receive copies directly or indirectly through you, then the only way
you could satisfy both it and this License would be to refrain entirely from
distribution of the Program.

Or, as stated by Eben Moglen, the attourney for the FSF:

"If you make an agreement which requires you to pay a royalty to anybody for
the right to distribute GPL software, you may not distribute it under the GPL."

Obviously, the GPL is the reason why Novell must go on record with the
assertion that neither Linux nor its other open source offerings infringe upon
any Microsoft patents. To say otherwise would be to admit Novell is violating
the GPL. 

However, if its assertions were true, there would be no reason to pay Microsoft
royalties on the sales of Linux and open source products in order to protect
its customers from patent infringment lawsuits. Here, Novell's actions speak
much louder than its empty words. No, Brad Smith's words speak even louder,
because his statement is pretty clear that Novell is paying royalties to
Microsoft in order to prevent Microsoft from suing its customers. Once again,
we must conclude that one of the two explanations above must be true. Only in
this case, either Novell is paying Microsoft FUD money, or Novell is violating
the GPL. 

Five year deal in a six year plan

For five full years, Microsoft says it will promote SUSE. For five years,
Novell will guarantee its customers immunity to patent lawsuits by Microsoft. 

What happens after the five years pass? I seem to recall Microsoft made five
year (or similar length) deals with Sybase, Symantec, Corel, Borland, Citrix,
and other companies that thrived before the deals only to be reduced to
insignificant gnats afterward. All of these deals involved giving the company a
bundle of money and promising them they'd prosper. All of these companys were
promptly discarded as partners once Microsoft gained what it needed to
eliminate them as serious competition. 

Microsoft has once again suckered a company. It dangled pretty, shiny
short-term gains in front of Novell/SUSE while, at worst, planning their
long-term extinction, at best, planning to use the success of Novell/SUSE to
bleed its customer base. If Novell/SUSE becomes the king of Linux in five
years, you can bet Microsoft will send its thugs over to Novell and raise its
"no-sue covenant" protection payments through the roof. I've compared Microsoft
to Al Capone before. I see no reason to think Microsoft has morphed into a
kinder gentler thug. 

My five year deal

I propose the following as an alternative five year deal between Linux users
and Microsoft. 

First Front

Novell/SUSE users and customers should wipe Novell/SUSE off their disks and
install virtually any non-Novell/SUSE alternative in its place. Dump all MONO
development for any of the many excellent alternatives, and abandon your
investment in all Novell-based open or closed source tools. Ditch Evolution for
one of the many great alternatives. Deep-six anything that has the smell of
Novell/SUSE on it. 

Granted, this will take time for some organizations. Don't worry, you've got
five years. As long as you refuse to send another penny to Novell while you
migrate, the plan will work. 

Here's the point. Microsoft is attempting to manipulate (read: control and/or
extinquish) Linux. Its plan is to make Novell/SUSE the king of Linux within the
next five years. Once that five years is completed and Novell/SUSE Linux is on
top, Microsoft will be in a position to do just about anything it wants. It can
eradicate Linux, sabotage it, or simply demand outrageous fees from Novell/SUSE
for every copy sold. Who do you think will pay those fees? You, if you adopt
Novell/SUSE products. And that money will simply funnel right to Microsoft. You
might just as well give up on Linux right now and adopt Vista, if that's the
road you want to take. 

I say, no! Force Microsoft's hand. Subvert Microsoft's plan by refusing to use
Novell/SUSE products, and Microsoft will have no other way to manipulate the
future of Linux except through patent lawsuits. In a Novell/SUSE-free world,
Microsoft will have no other choice. 

Microsoft has been preparing for this war for a long time. Why do you think
Microsoft bought the patent for OpenGL? Let the war begin, if Microsoft dares.
Let IBM whip out its patent portfolio. I don't mind playing a game of "let's
you and him fight" while I use Debian, Fedora, or whatever. Neither should you.
And don't fear that possibility that Microsoft can threaten your use of a
non-Novell/SUSE Linux while they fight it out. I am certain that Microsoft
would be restricted from doing so by an injunction until the matter is settled.
Any alternative would be to grant Microsoft a risk-free monopoly on the server
market. 

Second Front

The Free Software Foundation lawyers should stop wasting its time trying to
eradicate DRM through licenses that won't get adopted or work, and spend their
time enforcing the license that is already in widespread use. Take Novell to
court over its violation of section 7 of the GPL. Force Novell to explain why
it is paying Microsoft royalties to guarantee that Microsoft won't sue its
customers over patent infringements that do not exist. 

Indeed, if, as the company claims, Novell/SUSE Linux and its Open Source
software does not infringe on any Microsoft patents, then Microsoft should be
brought up on charges of racketeering for asking Novell to pay money to prevent
Microsoft from suing its customers. 

From the Wikipedia on Racket (my comment in []):

Several forms of racket exist. The best-known is the protection racket, in
which criminals demand money from businesses in exchange for the service of
"protection" against crimes that the racketeers instigate [such as suing SUSE
customers under false charges of patent infringements] if unpaid. Or, "pay me
so that you won't have a 'mysterious fire' in your warehouse ..."

As I say in one of the comments below, if there are no patent infringements in
Novell/SUSE Linux closed and open source products, then Microsoft is simply
collecting protection money by threatening to use its deep pockets to tie up
Novell/SUSE and/or Novell/SUSE customers with lawsuits over patent violations
that don't exist. That is clearly racketeering. 

No matter who is guilty of what, I refuse to be a part of it. By the end of
this day, SUSE Linux will no longer soil my hard drive. I'm taking a stand. How
about you? 

Links
[1] http://www.novell.com/linux/microsoft/faq_opensource.html

Source URL: http://interactive.linuxjournal.com/node/1000121

--- BBBS/NT v4.00 MP
 * Origin: Omicron Theta (1:261/1)