OK, remember that Novell has made claims that they own the IP that SCO
says is in Linux, which submarines SCO's case- but not Novell's, so it is
not inconceivable that Novell now makes SCO's move and asks for royalties
on Linux, but with an actual case, perhaps.
Ask Mr. Ballmer what he means by:
"If a customer says, 'Look, do we have liability for the use of your
patented work?' Essentially, If you're using non-SUSE Linux, then I'd say
the answer is yes," Ballmer said.
Then, read Section 7 of the GPL that you think Novell feels bound by and
would never violate:
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.
Some have said this is not a patent cross-license agreement, technically,
but this is how it is described in the SEC filing:
Under the Patent Cooperation Agreement, Microsoft commits to a covenant
not to assert its patents against Novell's end-user customers for their
use of Novell products and services for which Novell receives revenue
directly or indirectly from such customers, with certain exceptions,
while Novell commits to a covenant not to assert its patents against
Microsoft's end-user customers for their use of Microsoft products and
services for which Microsoft receives revenue directly or indirectly from
such customers, with certain exceptions.
So, you now have a choice- be a paying licensee of Novell Linux or be
exposed to potential litigation, how does this differ from SCOSource?
If you want more information, checkout PJ at Groklaw.net, she is always
incredibly thorough in her research.
-shane
On Wednesday 08 November 2006 12:10, Chris Gregan wrote:
I agree with Petre. It is a little early to be carving the Novell
headstone because of a resource sharing, and patent protection agreement
with Microsoft that is really just a press release at this point. I have
read a ton of comments, and most clearly have no clue what this means.
Baseless speculation. The fact are that many FOSS projects believe this
is good for the community.
In addition, There is one major difference between the companies that
have made agreements in the past, and Novell/Suse. OpenSuse is free, and
community driven. Even if Novell where to become MSNovell, there is no
way they could stifle a community project. All the software being worked
on is GPL'd. The GPL prevents Novell/MS from denying any of that stack
from the public.
I worry that this is in fact the outcome MS was looking for. They sign a
deal, and in return, all of the users of one of their rivals, abandon
the product simply because of a press release.
I understand concerns, but I would not dump this highly usable, and well
designed OS simply on the knee jerk rantings of a few pundits. Simply
hedge the bet. Use SLES servers and Ubuntu desktops, or Red Hat servers
and SLED/opensuse desktops, but nothing I have read, or discovered in
the release would make me think this is the beginning of the end of
Novell and it's commitment to FOSS.
Here are some more pragmatic responses to the news:
http://www.linux-watch.com/news/NS9843352777.html
http://www.kdedevelopers.org/node/2511
Chris Gregan
cgregan@xxxxxxxxxxx
Open Source Migration Specialist/Founder
Aptenix LLC-Desktop Solutions
New Market, MD
(240)422-9224
"Open source, open minds."
This message is confidential, intended only for the named recipient(s)
and may contain information that is privileged or exempt from disclosure
under applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient(s), you are
notified that the dissemination, distribution, or copying of this
message is strictly prohibited. If you receive this message in error or
are not the named recipient(s), please notify the sender at either the
fax address or telephone number above and delete this message. Thank
you.
Petre Scheie wrote:
Perhaps 'hedge your bets' is a better strategy than 'boycott Novell' in
your case. Most people, even non-technical ones, will agree when you
say that many/most companies that allied with MS eventually get
absorbed or stabbed in the back--in either case, they go away.
Considering all that MS has said about Linux, there's no reason to
consider this deal will be any different. Perhaps it won't turn out
bad for Novell. But what your school needs to be doing is thinking
strategically, such that if Novell does end up in a bad position as a
result of this deal, your school and its technology plan aren't in a
position that suddenly becomes very expensive. The diversity of Linux
distributions is one of its strengths. If one vendor does something
that isn't in your best interest, you can move to another fairly
easily. If MS or Apple do something that's good for them at your
expense, and your technology plan is built around them, it's difficult
to change, meaning you sigh, and then increase class size so you can
eliminate a teacher to pay for MS's or Apple's price increase. The
point is to be thinking NOW about where you want to be in two or three
years so that if Novell does collapse, you can say "Good thing we made
those changes back in 2006 such that Novell's demise/MS's tightening
restrictions/price increase doesn't affect us." One could argue that
this MS/Novell deal gives you a real opportunity to convince your
colleagues of the danger of your 'full investment in Novell' and the
need to move away from such mono-culture, as it provides you with an
occasion to remind people of how these deals usually play out, and how
your school should take steps to make sure it's not on the short end of
such an agreement.
Petre
Michael Bendorf wrote:
the other penny is for maintenance
I am a bit confused. At CCUSD#1 we have a full investment in Novell as
our NOS and have MS desktops - how would I make the suggestion to
"Boycott Novell"?
As a personal user running Fedora and sharing Ubuntu with less Linux
savvy persons wanting to get away from M$ I understand, but I have to
question what this will mean from a district in the situation I find
here.
I have to put it out there that I am personally a peon when it comes
to these decisions and have only been in the Ed. Tech. scene for about
18 months. I love it when my opinion is asked for though, and so have
been thinking about what I would do if it were my choice.
Michael T. Bendorf
Technology Assistant
Intermediate School
shane@xxxxxxxxxxx 11/07/06 8:38 PM >>>
Simple. Boycott Novell. They will go the way of SCO.
This is MS going after Oracle's deep pockets, and Novell gets to knock
out all competition and secure an up-front payment as well as
ownership of the linux market, which MS will allow to remain a small
healthy percentage to stave off antitrust allegations- A nice little
lapdog for MS, that they actually derive revenue from in perpetuity,
nice.
MS propped up SCO against IBM, but the sticker was IBM has never
distributed linux and Novell claimed its own rights over the contested
"IP"
. SCO has no case, and is rotting on the vine. Even if Novell gets
to finally see SCO in court, there will be no SCO left. Novell has
been seen by the community as a defender, and has steadily caught up
to and surpassed the leader redhat in terms of enterprise linux
offerings. Honestly, SLED was probably the best enterprise distro out
there, imho.
Now, days after Oracle threatens to not only destroy redhat and SuSE
in the enterprise space with its Unbreakable Linux and support
(including indemnification from ip litigation - $chaching$), but
actually threaten MS and its trainwreck Vista in the enterprise
(imagine not having to upgrade all of your hardware just to run a
slightly more secure OS), we hear about this Novell-MS partnership -
expect them to go after the first big Oracle customer, and then when
Oracle steps in on their behalf - watch out.
That's my two cents, but I only get a penny for my thoughts, so where
does the other penny go?
-shane
On Tuesday 07 November 2006 09:18, *********|Praveen wrote:
2006/11/7, Michael Bendorf <bendorfm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
So, I'm sure that some on this list run a Novell network (as we do
at Carlinville CUSD#1).
I am in wanting of comments/questions/concerns/opinions on this.
Novell-Microsoft: What They Aren't Telling
You<http://technocrat.net/d/2006/11/2/9945>
By Bruce Perens
"There are two significant announcements. First, that Novell and
Microsoft
are entering into a patent cross-license, and second, that Microsoft
is promising not to assert its patents against individual
non-commercial developers. The bad part is that this sets Mirosoft up
to assert its patents against all commercial Open Source users. There
are also some little bonuses for Microsoft, like Novell will help
Microsoft turn back the
Open Document Format and substitute something Microsoft controls.
When we say "commercial", it's interesting to note that there are
really few non-commercial users: people who only use their computer
for a hobby.
Buying something on a web site, for example, is a commercial use.
Most individuals use their computers in some aspect of making their
livelihood.
There will now be a Microsoft-approved path for such people to make
use of
Open Source, an expensive subscription to Novell SuSe Linux that
costs as
much or more than Microsoft Windows and that comes with a patent
license."
Full article at http://technocrat.net/d/2006/11/2/9945