Who hasn't Microsoft signed a patent deal with?
With Microsoft's announcement of yet another patent cross-licensing deal this week, it would seem nearly everyone has a deal with Redmond.
The company has inked a lot of deals since it began its patent deal push a few years back, signing folks from Sun Microsystems to Novell to Samsung. So it's getting a lot less interesting to write up each one of these things. As the latest one crossed my desk earlier this week, I had an idea. Rather than write up a story on how another name got added to the list (Pentax), I'd focus on something far more interesting--who's not on the list.
The most vocal about not being on that list, hands down, is Red Hat. The Linux seller has been adamant in resisting Microsoft's idea of a "patent bridge" in which commercial open-source companies pay Redmond money and, in return, Microsoft offers to indemnify them--and their users--from intellectual property claims.
"The reality is that the community development approach of free and open-source code represents a healthy development paradigm, which, when viewed from the perspective of pending lawsuits related to intellectual property, is at least as safe as proprietary software," the company said in a 2007 statement. "We are also aware of no patent lawsuit against Linux. Ever. Anywhere."
Red Hat is not alone among Linux companies in saying no to Microsoft, despite its claim that open-source software infringes hundreds of Microsoft patents. Mandriva, among others, also spoke out against the need for such a pact.
But it's not just Linux companies that have not signed an accord with Redmond. Two other names worth noting from General Counsel Brad Smith's not-yet-friends list are search king Google and database giant Oracle.
In both cases, Microsoft competes pretty head-on with those companies' products, so it's not surprising that they would be among the companies with whom Microsoft either hasn't sought, or hasn't struck, a deal.
Microsoft declined to comment on why any particular companies might not be on the list. Representatives from Oracle and Google also declined to comment.
Anyone have any names that I missed? And who will be next to sign? Sound off with your guesses below.
During her years at CNET News, Ina Fried has changed beats several times, changed genders once, and covered both of the Pirates of Silicon Valley. These days, most of her attention is focused on Microsoft. E-mail Ina. 
Of course, your list does not describe what exactly is being cross licensed. This is not necessarily just Windows OS/Linux stuff. Cross licensing is not unusual for any company with a substantial amount of IP. Particularly when there is some potential contention to the providence of the IP.
While it is somewhat interesting who is not being cross licensed, what is more interesting is why Microsoft has been aggressively pursuing this. The common thought is so they can claim a greater coverage of their IP. However, it may also be to prevent themselves from being sued for patent violations by some of these cross licensees.
I don't think Microsoft really wants to sue anyone for violating Windows patents because it may entail them having to disclose more of their codebase (such suits can be double edge swords). By the same token, if they get sued, they will either have to pay off the suit or risk similar disclosure as above. Such disclosures of their codebase (beyond what has already been disclosed through anti-trust actions in the USA and EU) could be embarrassing, expensive, and could undermine the security, integrity, and confidence of their user base.
I think Ballmer had his head up his butt with the Yahoo thing. Gates has to rein him in on things of that nature. A bulldog he is, and a bully to boot at times, but he just ain't no Bill Gates. Ray Ozzie is another thing. He should probably be CEO and Ballmer booted for his idiocy with Yahoo.
Add these to your list:
- Kyocera
- Alpine
- Olympus
- Autodesk
- Cadence
- Epson
- JVC
- Citrix Systems
- Kenwood
- Linspire
- Alacritech
- Broadcom
- Onkyo
- Xandros
- by darkeen May 15, 2008 4:43 PM PDT
- SCO produced ScoUnix.
- Like this Reply to this comment
-
(13 Comments)This is not Linux.
Microsoft forcing people to sign agreements to not sue them for Patent infringement without pointing out the exact patents or providing evidence is the same as the mafia walking into your business and asking for payment for Non breaking your kneecaps. The only difference is the Amount of damage done - businesses going under affect a lot more people than a couple of mafia guys can inflict damage upon.
Why is the American legal system allowing this extortion and blackmail?