More on the OSP


I have not seen any official document summarising the outcome of the OOXML seminar at UNSW last year. However, the main thing that I have heard unofficially in relation to the open specification promise is that pains were taken to compare its wording to the wording of similar promises made by IBM.

To make such a comparison presupposes that when two people say the same thing they ought to receive the same reception. Is this justified?

Microsoft on Patents

Microsoft’s recent history on patents (particularly since the Novell deal in November 06) has a particularly public persona:

Microsoft General Counsel Brad Smith and licensing chief Horacio Gutierrez sat down with Fortune recently to map out their strategy for getting FOSS users to pay royalties. – Fortune

“Novell pays us some money for the right to tell customers that anybody who uses SuSE Linux is appropriately covered,” Ballmer said. “This is important to us, because [otherwise] we believe every Linux customer basically has an undisclosed balance-sheet liability.” Techworld

“We’ve had an issue, a problem that we’ve had to confront, which is because of the way the GPL (General Public License) works, and because open-source Linux does not come from a company — Linux comes from the community — the fact that that product uses our patented intellectual property is a problem for our shareholders. We spend $7 billion a year on R&D, our shareholders expect us to protect or license or get economic benefit from our patented innovations. …
“… we agreed on … essentially an arrangement under which they pay us some money for the right to tell the customer that anybody who uses Suse Linux is appropriately covered… They’ve appropriately compensated Microsoft for our intellectual property, which is important to us. In a sense you could say anybody who has got Linux in their data center today sort of has an undisclosed balance sheet liability, because it’s not just Microsoft patents.”

Steve Ballmer on SeattlePI Blog

Microsoft’s latest licensing push stems from its claim that FOSS infringes on 235 of its patents, and that those patents are intellectual property that should result in fair compensation to Microsoft in the form of licensing fees. LinuxInsider

Microsoft chief executive Steve Ballmer has warned users of Red Hat Linux that they will have to pay Microsoft for its intellectual property.
“People who use Red Hat, at least with respect to our intellectual property, in a sense have an obligation to compensate us,” Ballmer said last week at a company event in London discussing online services in the UK. VUNet

Mr. Ballmer once called Linux a form of intellectual-property cancer. While he has since dialed back the rhetoric, the subtext remains in nearly all Microsoft discussions of Linux: Use it, and you run the risk that Microsoft will sue you [for patent infringement]. Post-Gazette

So the two top level points [about the Novell-MS deal], as Ron whispered to me, technical interoperability and patent peace of mind, and we’re trying to provide both of those things to our customers in a way that works for the business interest of the open source development community, and the Microsoft development community. – Steve Ballmer at the Press Conference announcing the Novell-MS Deal.

… Steve Ballmer has claimed that Microsoft signed its patent peace deal with Novell because Linux “uses our patented intellectual property” and Microsoft wanted to be “appropriately compensated.” Business Review Online

The efforts of Microsoft to pressure the Linux community over alleged and unspecified patents is akin to “patent terrorism”, according to an executive for Sun. ZDNet

Microsoft’s patent push is stimulated by a number of factors. One is competition and trying to make sure that Microsoft’s rivals don’t get access to key innovations. However, the company also began a broad intellectual-property licensing push several years ago, under which it licenses technology to many companies big and small. The company has signed a slew of patent cross-licensing deals since then, the most recent being Tuesday’s deal with Japan’s JVC. CNet News.com

For those who have access to Google, there are others in a similar vein. Perhaps those who are not in the open source community will not be as aware of this history.

IBM on Patents

IBM’s public history in respect of patents is a little different (I have not included any references to IBM’s patent promise from last year):

IBM is playing a pioneering role in the World Business Council for Sustainable Development’s program to open environmentally-responsible patents to the general community. IT-Wire

Following up on a promise last August to not use its vast patent portfolio against Linux users, IBM pledged in January to give 500 patents to open source developers. Linux-Mag

The Open Invention Network was formed with undisclosed investments from IBM Corp. [and others] …When the Open Invention Network acquires patents they will be available to any company, institution or individual that agrees not to assert its patents against the Linux OS or certain Linux-related applications, it said in a statement. PC-Welt

The Nub

My guess is that the Open Source Community would see it in roughly these terms:
Two people want to come onto your land but you’re concerned that they don’t fish in your lagoon. The first one has spent the last 18 months talking about how he has rights over those fish and he’s mapped out a strategy to get them and if you want peace of mind you’d better give him some of those fish. The second one has made some non specific noises about fish and some off hand comments to the effect that fish ought to be left alone. Both of them tell you if they come on your land they won’t fish in the lagoon.
Should you take each of them at their word equally or should you be more cautious with one of them?
[edit 20/1/08 adding three headings]
About these ads

8 Responses to “More on the OSP”


  1. 1 brian 20 January 2008 at 3:34 pm

    I have yet to finish the fortune article, the first one you mention but I can tell you that I didn’t get to the bottom of the first page and saw an issue…

    The legal counsel for MS mentions a patent licensing deal with Sun, and some others not to sue… At the bottom of the first page they point out that Open Office violates a few MS patents. I am not sure how that could play out but the last time I checked Open Office is a product that Sun (the same one in the patent deal) let out into the wild. Doesn’t that negate 45 or so patents that M$ claims?

  2. 2 blackhole 21 January 2008 at 5:24 am

    “The legal counsel for MS mentions a patent licensing deal with Sun, and some others not to sue? At the bottom of the first
    page they point out that Open Office violates a few MS patents. I am not sure how that could play out but the last time I
    checked Open Office is a product that Sun (the same one in the patent deal) let out into the wild. Doesn?t that negate 45 or so
    patents that M$ claims?”

    IIRC the license covered Star Office but explicitly excluded OpenOffice.org. A number of people were rather upset at Sun over this.
    

  3. 3 frmad 21 January 2008 at 11:31 am

    This post is very hot, it is high ranked at our site (daily weblog, weblog post ranking site). See http://indirect6.blogspot.com/ for more information

  4. 4 Temp 7 January 2009 at 1:44 am

    Actually the Microsofts OSP licensing is older than IBM’s Interoperability Pledge.
    So actually it looks that it has been IBM that has been copying the OSP.
    And IBM is using it to license patent claims on ODF.

    So any objection to OSP is now directly objecting to ODF licensing as well.


  1. 1 Screenshots of the Newly-released Ballnux 11 Alpha 1, Microsoft Racketeering in Details Trackback on 2 March 2009 at 8:32 pm
  2. 2 Patents against Open Source « Brendan Scott’s Weblog Trackback on 12 March 2010 at 4:47 pm
  3. 3 The Patent War of All Against All « Brendan Scott’s Weblog Trackback on 12 March 2010 at 4:51 pm
  4. 4 The Updated OSP and Free Software Interoperability « Brendan Scott’s Weblog Trackback on 12 March 2010 at 5:37 pm

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s




Blog Stats

  • 152,371 hits

OSWALD Newsletter

If you would like to receive OSWALD, a weekly open source news digest please send an email to oswald (with the subject "subscribe") at opensourcelaw.biz

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

%d bloggers like this: