Ballmer attacks Linux on patent front

Microsoft CEO says Linux may not really be free given the intellectual-property risks.

The story "Ballmer attacks Linux on patent front" published November 18, 2004 at 4:22 AM is no longer available on CNET News.

Content from Reuters expires after 30 days.

Scare Tactics

This is a sign of real desperation by Microsoft. The writing is on
the wall, and no amount of lawsuits will prevent the inevitable.

[rkhalloran]

If you can't win by merit, sue

The "Asian market", especially the governments, appear to be favoring OSS to promote local vendors, open formats, and most importantly keep money in local hands vs. paying a US company for basic software. This is anathema to Microsoft; the US and European markets are effectively saturated, and they need Asia to maintain their growth and keep the stock pumped. I suppose with the MS-funded SCO FUD-fest imploding, Ballmer needs to go direct.

I think he's likely to find that threatening foreign governments with lawsuits if they don't toe the MS line isn't likely to help his business, especially when they see a viable alternative. Foot, meet bullet.

[David Arbogast]

Implication mistake

Microsoft warned that legal troubles are looming. They did NOT threaten to sue Asian governments over Linux. There is a BIG difference. You are correct that Microsoft really wants (and some would argue, needs) the Asian market... but they aren't stupid enough to walk in and threaten to sue if their customer uses a different product. Business is business, and competitors will always be grabbing for more... but lets not infer threats where they don't exist.

[Apostata]

What about the Patriot Act?

Would the Patriot Act not allow the FBI and CIA (et al) to gain access to Microsoft's customer list if they wanted?

I'd say that's a lot more concerning than the patent straw-man they are currently dangling.

[David Arbogast]

2 questions

1. Why would the FBI or CIA want Microsoft's customer list?

2. Why would anybody care if they requested it?

More clueless FUD

I can't believe he can claim, with a straight face that windows is more secure then linux. The only thing less secure then windows is a huge pile of cash sitting in the middle of central park.

As for the rest, that is nonsense. SCO can't prove a thing, because there is nothing there but smoke caused by an illegal, scared corporation who sees their monolopy disolving in the face on their own incompetance.

How many patches has windows XP seem in the past 3 years? After all that it is still very unsecure. The only thing microsoft stands behind is a large pile of crap.

Steve Balmer is an idiot.

[David Arbogast]

Correction

"incompetance"
is actually spelled, "incompetence."
Not a correction I would have expected to make for somebody who is claiming Balmer is an idiot.

[Earl Benser]

Ballmer conceeds defeat

The only way that a rational explaination for Ballmer's gaffe'
could be formulated is the position that M$ openly recognizes
that Linux is the ultimate Windows-Killer and thus desperate
measures are needed to delay the inevitable.

On the other hand, Ballmer's previous press releases have
demonstrated that he's not the brightest bulb in corporate
mangement. Maybe he actually believes this sort of M$ BS.

Now that's a frightening thought!

[GrandpaN1947]

Americanization of Asia

Does this mean that I should fear using Linux here in the states too? Am I going to end up paying Microsoft money for all the years I've used Linux?

Perhaps Apple should consider suiing Microsoft.

[David Arbogast]

You bet!

Yes! That is EXACTLY what it means!

-SCO is sueing over Linux.
-Microsoft warns of upcoming Linux legal troubles.
-HP offers Linux indemnification program
-Novell offers Linux indemnification program
-Red Hat offers iLinux indemnification program
-SUSE offers Linux indemnification program
-BRUCE PERENS starts a business (OSRM) to help protect Linux users from patent-based law suits.

"I want to be very careful about that, because OSRM is not capitalizing on FUD (fear, uncertainty, and doubt), OSRM is going around and talking about what the real risks and benefits are."
-Perens 5/7/04 InfoWorld

OSRM = Open Source Risk Management

If you still have absolutely no concern, you are missing the big picture. Just about the only group suggesting that indemnification is unnecessary is IBM. And how would it look, given their current law suit if they agreed that protection was necessary? Consider also that IBM is about the only company not offering indemnification who can actually afford to lose a $3Billion lawsuit. Whether you think it has merit or not. OSRM alone hopes to bank over $10 million in profit to use fighting legal battles. Now, why doesn't this market exist for Microsoft software? Because it is not needed.

[AndiC1977]

This sounds like blackmail to me!

some of the 228 patents belong to companies that support linux.

This sounds like blackmail to me!

[David Arbogast]

yes.....

"some"
Not all.
This is a competitive move that alerts others to potential legal risks involved with using Linux. It is not a lie, and it is not FUD. As a Linux advocate, it is annoying and troubling to hear, yet again. As a Windows advocate, it sounds like ongoing business.

1 single stolen movie will get you sued by the MPAA.

1 single unethical stock tip will get you thrown in the slammer.

1 single accounting scandal will destroy your life and your company.

1 single patent infringement in Linux has the potential to cause nightmares too. And in reality, there are over 200. How can so many people deny this??

R U Serious

Gates of all people - claiming Linux is not secure and based on pirated code!!! HAHAHAHA.

Excuse me: Where did DOS come from??? Basically ripped off from some poor developer who, I'm sure, never saw a penny of the profits.

Gates calls himself the Chief Software Engineer of Microsoft. How many lines of code do you think the guy has written in his life??? NONE???

Also, I am forced to develop in a Microsoft environment. This is where I have learned that Linux is by far superior in all respects. Once again, I have delved deep into MS techology (Office 2003, Infopath, etc.) only to find the IDEs are not well concieved or even thoroughly thought through....a fact one only discovers once completely committed to the given techology of the project. I deeply resent everything Microsoft and really think Gates has a nerve. Long live Linux! I hope every government from municipal to national follows suit with China. I know our state government in Texas is going open source. Everyone is SICK OF MICROSUCK.

[David Arbogast]

do some research

Gates has never written a single line of code, and DOS was ripped off from some poor developer who never made a dime???

First of all.. the developer you describe sounds like an open-source participant.

But that aside... you are completely and totally wrong on both accusations. We'd all respect your opinion a lot more if you demonstrated that you had some clue about the matters you discuss.

Gates did actually steal code, but also wrote some

MS-DOS was originally called QDOS (Quick and
Dirty OS) and was bought from Tim Paterson of
Seattle Computer Products. Microsoft did later
put an encrypted DR-DOS detector into Windows 3
which crashed the installer if it saw DR-DOS.

Gates actually came out and said that he went
dumpster-diving for other people's code
(presumbly guaranteed to be buggy) and if you
have a close look at his original Altair BASIC,
the harder parts were written by Monte Davidoff,
who doesn't appear on Microsoft's site at all
today, but does work excitedly with Linux and
Python.

Gates is (or was) a reasonably prolific if
somewhat eccentric coder; his main problem
appears to be an obsession with proving that his
"Trey" nickname isn't a diminuitive, which in
turn implies (money and) power at any sacrifice.
Which is where Microsoft's problems with
monopoly, security and the like originate.

As to Steve being a nut-job... well, he expects
at some time in the future to be able to take
security _off_ his ToDo list. Your call.

Oh, but when SUN does it, it's OK...

Sun is effectively using the same strategy by announcing indemnification to their open-source Solaris OS, and is privately telling customers that Linux is a patent timebomb. But Microsoft is the one that comes in for the vilification in the press.

[David Arbogast]

Not Just MS and Sun. Bruce Pernes also!!

Microsoft is always the villin. The News.com readers will make sure of that.

And its really funny too. Even Bruce Perens acknowledges that Linux contains over 280 patent violations, and has started a company that profits by selling legal protection to Linux users. LoL... how much more evidence do you need?

Of course... Gates is the person who spells it out the way it is, and people hate him for it.

If you willingly accept stolen property, and somebody tells you there is legitimate risk involved, they are not just spreading FUD. They are speaking truth.

[Jonathan]

Who's the terrorist now?

MS thungs. Gotta love it.

[David Arbogast]

Ugly Thugs

The ugly thugs are a bummer, for sure. Not exactly the most polite way to conduct business. But you can't deny they have a point.

[sysopdr]

What next(re Balmer saying using linux will get you sued)

So what's next from MS? Are they going to start suing people who don't use computers? Is doing math in your head an infringement or MS IP?

[David Arbogast]

Actually...

That very idea... (use Linux, get sued) has already been introduced by Perens, McNealy, Szulik, Messman, Fiorina, McBride, and plenty of others. Suggesting that Microsoft is going to introduce this idea is silly. Microsoft is actually one of the last companies to advertise this argument.

[David Arbogast]

Stirring the pot

"They are going to come after us foot, horse, and marine with lawsuits that will make open source illegal based on patent infringement," Raymond said. "That really does worry me; it's a feasible strategy."

--Eric Raymond 11/7/02 - pcworld.com

[Fray9]

Victory by atrophy

I beleive the strategy he was speaking of was inundating a company with frivilous and unbased lawsuits in an attempt to either force the company into bankruptcy or forcing them to concede defeat in order to save the last of their assets. Either way they lose and the attacking companies dont have to prove a thing in the end.

[zeroplane]

When a country uses linux how can you sue it?

When a whole country's government decides to use Linux as apposed to Windows. How can a corporation(s) sue a country and it's people over IP violations in that offending country? Would they resort to sanctions? Wouldn't that be enacted by the US government and not the IP owner? Or really are they the same thing? America a corporate state. ;)

Seriously though, how could a corporation sue a country and the individuals of the country? Especially if the country used a completely open source non-maintained distribution of Linux that is not tied to a single corporation. The lidigation and collection of such a case would be impossible to enforce if not thrown out by the courts of said governments.

Unenforcible and without merrit globally. US patent law is just that. US Law not global law.

Only time will tell I guess.

Ballmer is still doing trick-or-treat

Ballmer is doing trick-or-treat to Linux adopters. He should wake up. Nobody will take his comment on Linux seriously. Microsot violates more law than his allegation of Linux. Simply look at all the anti-trust lawsuit. Microsoft is not a fair game player. Shame on him

[David Arbogast]

Small error

"Unenforcible and without merrit globally"

Totally untrue. There are provisions for international business and mandates regarding respect for foreign law.

The large print giveth, the small print taketh away

Microsoft's "indemnification" has loopholes in it
you could drive a bus through, and we've already
seen (cf TimeLine lawsuit) they they _do_
shortchange on licensing and they _don't_
adequately defend their customers (in this case
MS SQL developers). The short story is: don't bet
the farm on their assurances.

Meanwhile, how many patents dows MS-Windows
really violate? Are Microsoft goign to be honest
enough to cough up the truth on that front?

never

MS would never release all the source code to windows and its demon spawn. They don't want people to know they wrote it in crayon.

In all seriousness, MS will never, ever agree to play on an even playing field. They know they have no chance to survive then.

We might know..

who is writing code at MS. We just don't want them to. He is trying to give the impression that open source programmers are anonymous. Nothing could be further then the truth. Reputation matters in open source, and obviously not at microsoft.

interesting

Thank you for that. I'd never thought of it that way, and it's a very interesting point.

I can tell my wife I learned something today :D

[richard.watson]

If you can't beat them...

Open source needs it's own list of patents. All the big companies have patent portfolios to use offensively or defensively, and this is something that disadvantages anybody who does not have one. Individually, it costs a lot to patent, but there has to be a way to work it if we do it together - invest what we can afford, help select patenteable technologies and get some lawyers. Just do for admin, legal etc what we do for the writing of the software itself.

That just hurts everyone

What needs to happen is software patents need to be banned. There is no legitimate reason for them. Every piece of software is nothing more then a collection of primitive data types, control structures, and data structures and a few other things.

It is not even close to inventing a new gadget, all software is, is a different way to use exisiting language constructs. Now what does that sound like? Writing a book or article or inventing something new? How are written words protected?

Copyrights, that is all that is needed for software.

[unknown unknown]

An example of the crap Microsoft has been patenting...

http://appft1.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PG01&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsrchnum.html&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=%2220040230959%22.PGNR.&OS=DN/20040230959&RS=DN/20040230959

if this is the kind of stuff Microsoft is building it's patent portfolio on the Linux community has little to worry about.

LOL

Patenting a pointer?

That is all that needs to be said about software and patents. What a frelling joke.

Power is stronger than reason

You can't deny the conceptual stupidity of software patenting.

But SO WHAT?

Microsfts lobbyists in Washington will make sure Bush, the DoC, the FCC, the Supreme Court, the USPA and the rest of Washington "see" things their way. There will only be the slimmest chance for logic, reason and public benefit.

All this "Naw, no chance... it doesn't make sense if you really think about it" is a load.

The only chance is if IBM and HP lobby just as hard the other way. But they really don't give a damn because they've got their own pattent portfolios and lawyers to protect them.

Enjoy your GNU/linux while you can. I certainly am. Because things will only get worse.
Your not sure? Read: http://www.free-culture.cc

[DragonKingMasterxxx]

The Destroyer

Linux is destroying the software industry

[nealda]

Really?

So should we enact some protectionist provisions into the law to prevent Linux from taking market share away from Microsoft? Isn't this supposed to be a free market?
If computer users prefer Linux over other software, should we force them to use Microsoft products instead in order to protect the "software industry?"
Why don't you consider Linux to be part of the software industry? How can software destroy the software industry? Your post makes no sense at all.

eh....

You mean Linux (and open source) is CHANGING the software industry, don't you? Kind of like automobiles changed the transportation industry, and thousands of other industries as a result?

I wish you the best in dealing with change.