Open-source leaders see Microsoft-TomTom suit as a threat
Despite Microsoft assurances that a patent lawsuit against GPS navigation company TomTom is not targeting the overall Linux community, open-source leaders said on Thursday that the legal action is antagonistic toward the movement.
Microsoft on Wednesday filed two separate actions against TomTom before the U.S. District Court in Washington and the International Trade Commission, alleging infringement of eight patents, three of which involve Linux. Microsoft deputy general counsel Horacio Gutierrez said the legal actions were taken after attempts to negotiate on licensing failed.
Asked whether Microsoft would sue other open-source developers, Gutierrez said the software giant's dispute was with TomTom and should not be interpreted as a new salvo against Linux or as a shift in its position toward open-source software. "I think there shouldn't be any ambiguity on our expectations as a company. We recognize that open-source software will continue to be a part of the industry," he said.
However, open-source leaders were still bracing for a fight.
"Microsoft's behavior is threatening," said Eben Moglen, a Columbia Law School professor and chairman of the Software Freedom Law Center, a nonprofit that provides legal representation to developers and distributors of open-source software.
"The free (software) world has to defend itself," he said. "We are considering our options and evaluating the situation."
The move runs counter to Microsoft's efforts to work with open source, including announcing an interoperability alliance with Red Hat, embedding open source in its software, and adopting open-source strategies.
"The ongoing attempts to find a way of working more peacefully together are going to be hurt by this," Moglen said.
"I'm surprised Microsoft thinks they can get away with this and retain good relations to FLOSS (Free, Libre and Open Source Software) developers," Jeremy Allison, a prominent figure in the Samba open-source community, wrote in an e-mail. "Now we're seeing the mailed fist behind the velvet glove."
For now, Samba isn't affected by the litigation and Samba development won't change, Allison said.
Jim Zemlin, executive director of the Linux Foundation, said he wasn't making assumptions about the scope or intent of Microsoft's legal action, but was cautious nonetheless.
"It is our sincere hope that Microsoft will realize that cases like these only burden the software industry and do not serve their customers' best interests," he wrote in a blog posting entitled "Note on Microsoft TomTomSuite: Calm Down, Hope for the Best, Plan for the Worst."
The Linux Foundation "is well prepared for any claims against Linux," Zemlin wrote. "For now, we are closely watching the situation and will remain ready to mount a Linux defense, should the need arise."
Keith Bergelt, chief executive of the Open Invention Network, an intellectual property company that uses patents to promote a collaborative Linux ecosystem, predicted that the Microsoft litigation would have limited negative impact on the Linux landscape, partly because it remains to be seen whether the patents are valid. He too took jabs at Microsoft for its action.
"This indicates that they don't understand how to actually participate as a responsible member of the open-source or Linux community," he said of Microsoft. "And their behavior is clearly antagonistic to Linux. It's unfortunate they decided to adopt this tact."
Bruce Perens, a founder of the open-source software movement, said he is concerned that Linux software is involved in the litigation and is watching the situation closely.
"Obviously we are looking at the software patent situation as we have been for 10 years," he said. "We do have our own defensive patents and we may bring some of them into action at some point" against a company like Microsoft.
Asked for comment, Microsoft spokesman Michael Marinello reiterated Gutierrez' statements that the litigation is targeting TomTom's specific implementation of the Linux kernel and that open-source software "is not the focal point of this action."
Patents at issue
While the open-source leaders accused Microsoft of being anti-open source in its latest litigation--which was only the third time Microsoft has sued over patent infringement--they said the Microsoft patents at issue do not seem valid.
"This case could come out very much to our advantage because it could finally put those patents to bed," Perens said.
One of the patents, which deals with the Windows 95 version of Microsoft's FAT file system entitled "A Common Namespace for Long and Short Filenames," was invalidated by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, but then part of it was re-issued on Microsoft appeal, Moglen said.
Microsoft could have trouble convincing a court of the validity of most of the other patents involved, too, said Van Lindberg, an attorney at Haynes and Boone and author of "Intellectual Property and Open Source."
Another patent, which deals with embedding a computer in a car, is questionable because of previous examples of Linux being used in cars before that patent application was filed in 1999, Lindberg said. And several of the other patents could be challenged under a 2008 federal court ruling "In re Bilski" which placed restrictions on "method" patents, excluding general business methods that are deemed to be abstract ideas, according to Lindberg.
Individual developers shouldn't be worried because the litigation is most likely part of Microsoft's licensing negotiations and an attempt to get TomTom to pay up, he said. However, longer term, it could be a first step in a broader campaign against Linux-using companies and a way to intimidate them into agreeing to patent cross-licensing deals, Lindberg said.
Microsoft spokesman Marinello said the two FAT Long File Name patents involved have been licensed to 18 companies and have each been affirmed twice by the patent office, and the car navigation technology patents also have been widely licensed.
"It is also important to note that our patent portfolio was recently given the topic rating for quality by the IEEE patent scorecard for the second year in a row, and we believe that is a testament to the innovation taking place at Microsoft and the quality of our patent portfolio," he said in an e-mail.
One Linux company, Timesys, wasn't worried.
"Linux has already been accepted as an embedded OS and is rapidly gaining popularity," Atul Bansal, chief executive of Timesys, wrote in an e-mail. "Microsoft recognizes this trend and clarified in their interview that this is a dispute between the two companies and not about Linux."
CNET News' Stephen Shankland contributed to this report.
Elinor Mills covers Internet security and privacy. She joined CNET News in 2005 after working as a foreign correspondent for Reuters in Portugal and writing for The Industry Standard, the IDG News Service, and the Associated Press. E-mail Elinor. 
I think Mr. Bansal is either naive or sleep walking and having a wishful dream.
Umm, yeah. They were using "transportable" IBMs and Osbornes and Apple IIcs tucked into racing cars in the seventies and early eighties. When Bosch made their first electronic fuel injection system in the seventies, that was a computer and it was tucked into a car.
OpenSource community should ask in the court to review Microsoft's initial position which is not fair !
Opensource has their source open to the entire world, so even Microsoft can sneak for possible "patent breaks", but Microsoft has CLOSED source code, so nobody knows - are there any patent breaks or not.
Is this equal position: if one player play with open cards, but another has rights to play with closed cards and asks judge to look closer only that player with open cards ?
At least at the court both parties should be equal and should come up with source code just because of there are no other options.
MS has decided to go nuclear, or at least attempt brinkmanship, which is a dangerous game. Even apple only rattled their saber at Palm, i doubt apple would dare to take them to court. I don't think any major company has attempted such a move, particularly considering that Linux use is very distributed, among thousands of companies and multi-nationally. These companies will have patent portfolios of their own. Tom-tom is in europe, where MS's actions in US courts stand to prove to Europe that MS is an abusive monopoly that does not support interoperability, particularly for such a worthless and technically obsolete filesystem such as FAT. Remember fat and fat 32 became defacto standards due to MS's monopoly advantage, you don't see MS including any other significant filesystems, besides NTFS which they wrote, in their operating systems, and third party drivers are not as seamless. For all effects and purposes, the world is forced to support FAT. In addition the FAT patents, and possibly the other patents, stand to be thrown out by a court, it barely survived the patent office. I focus on these two because of the scrutiny they have already faced and their widespread ramifications.
Anyways, MS is taking an awful lot of risk, one that could cost them billions and invite waves of new regulations from all over the world, just to go after one GPS device maker. I have to wonder, why? Patent threats may not be new, but filing a lawsuit means initiating the countdown to missile launch.
I think they are afraid the the bottom of the barrel from stock-price is coming off.
And right they are, they are already marching towards the single digit!
Arthur Rigley
CIO
Ripley SCOT
CIO/CEO and BS'r
Commander_Spock and Crew keep telling ya all that developments like these were bound happen and that is why OS/2 will be the way to go always since Windows and the "Code-Base OS/2 Journaled File System (JFS) and Tuxedo Clad Birds (the Linux OSes).... after billions of development dollars cannot up to now seem to be able to get the world's economy right as it continues to reel.
"To Boldly Go (At Warp Speed) Where None Has Gone Before"!
Let The Microsoft/Linux Battles Begin!
Long Live OS/2!
Live Long And Prosper!
Commander_Spock.
I think Microsoft is being forced to do it.
Despite its virtual Windows/Vista/V.7 monopoly in the United States, in the rest world Microsoft has lost customers to Linux and open source. China, one of America's major trading partners has adopted Linux and the Communist party in China has the political power to enforce its use. That could leave Microsoft on the outside of one of the worlds major economies scrambling to insure interoperability for its customers who want to do business with China. The 800 pound gorilla is China - not Microsoft.
The easy solution for those customers would be to adopt Linux and insure interoperability. That's not good for Microsoft's future.
The only path I see for Microsoft is to get legal rulings that it owns part of the Linux core. That way it can charge people for Linux.
Ask IBM!!!
Jobs-Baby-Jobs!
Come Work For Us For Free And Then Tell The World How You Will Get Your "Bills" Paid!
Quality of shipped goods? Recall's?
Country with most Piracy?
Wee, yess... Lets use China as a shining example.
Quality of shipped goods? Recall's?
Country with most Piracy?
Wee, yess... Lets use China as a shining example..."
You may have forgotten to state that the China owned - Lenovo bought that US gem "IBM PC" company and guess what HP became a brighter shining star around the world; and, it is going to get even brighter when when the Russian loved eConStation (OS/2) and possibly (CASSINI) launch later this year in a single effort to do for the world's economy what Windows (Code-Base OS/2) and 1001 Linux Iterations (Flavors) could not do in decades.
Time For Change!
Way to go microsoft! Go after all the idiots who write bad code in the
name of open source!
[url=http://www.healthycircles.com]PHR[/url]
Thanks for the information. I would like to know more about it.
Snoreta
PHR
Personally I'm interested to see what IBM's response will be. If you want to start a patent war, you don't want IBM against you, and they will be against Microsoft.
Well, if those were the "results" that the world could have gotten from Boca Raton.... then, who would want to bet against Microsoft.
Veteran Fighters (Redmond Code-Base OS/2 Warriors) are just what they are - Code-Base OS/2 Veterans; and, they are battle-hardened and know the "trenches" better than thousands of "new" recruits!
Re: "I.B.M. Plans to Consolidate OS/2 Development in Texas"
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=990CEFDC143CF93BA1575AC0A963958260
- by cracm February 27, 2009 2:09 PM PST
- The lawsuit is regarding fat support in the linux kernel. Microsoft should get counter-sued for antitrust not including ext3 support naively in their o/s. This is a clear bate and switch if they were against widespread fat usage.
- Like this Reply to this comment
-
-
- by Commander_Spock February 27, 2009 9:39 PM PST
- Here is a very simple solution for the entire planet - Have every one use OS/2. Do you hear about any law suits involving OS/2??? It is owned by several companies including IBM and Microsoft. And, it cannot be Open-Sourced for legal and other reasons.... so says IBM!
- Like this
-
(29 Comments)