[linux-elitists] [email@example.com: Microsoft proposing Free Software ban]
Karsten M. Self
Fri May 4 13:31:31 PDT 2001
on Thu, May 03, 2001 at 10:07:13AM -0400, Brooklyn Linux Solutions CEO (firstname.lastname@example.org) wrote:
> On 2001.05.03 10:00:12 -0400 Brooklyn Linux Solutions CEO wrote:
> Microsoft to argue against free code
> By Reuters
> May 3, 2001, 5:45 a.m. PT
A few interesting responses.
Greg Aharonian/PATNEWS: This isn't MS v. Free Software, it's MS v. IBM:
-- IBM AND MICROSOFT FIGHTING EACH OTHER, USING LINUX AS A WEAPON
Thursday's New York Times reports that a Microsoft official, Craig
Mundie, will be giving a speech arguing that one aspect of the open
source model, known as the General Public License (GPL), is a
potential trap that undercuts the commercial software business and
mirrors some of the worst practices of dot-com businesses, in which
goods were given away in an effort to attract visitors to Web sites.
GPL requires that any software using source code already covered by
the licensing agreement must become available for free distribution.
Quoting Mr. Mundie, "This viral aspect of the GPL poses a threat to
the intellectual property of any organization making use of it.",
and "The goal of GPL is sweeping up all of the intellectual property
that has been contributed. That creates many problems downstream,
many of which haven't come home to roost yet."
What's worrying Microsoft to attack the publicly popular Open Source
and GPL movements? IBM. IBM. IBM. IBM is putting billions into
Open Source, which could be a very powerful attack on Microsoft's
operating system dominance. More than most, Microsoft is well aware
of IBM embracing software technologies that work against IBM in
order to suffocate them (Ada and IBM's defense activities at the
time; Software Patent Institute and IBM's software patenting
activities). They probably figure that IBM will embrace GNU/Linux
long enough to hurt Microsoft substantially, and then come out with
proprietary enhancements (supported by workarounds of the various
Open Source licenses) that can crush the Open Source customers to
any degree IBM feels like.
This could explain Microsoft's actions. What I don't understand is
why the GNU/Linux and Open Source community aren't more wary of
IBM's presence in their industry. IBM has always done what is in
its best interests - it could care less about GNU/Linux and Open
Source. Heck, I wouldn't be surprised if they are filing patents
now for their proprietary enhancements to GNU/Linux and Open Source
that they could release in the future (knowing quite well that GPL
and other such licenses probably can be rendered impotent in front
of the courts, because in the end GPL has its prior art problems).
But Microsoft probably won't so speculate, IBM won't so confess, and
the GNU/Linux too clueless.
What scorched-earth gets you: Register: AOL's XP strategy
AOL is considering what amounts to all out war on Microsoft and
Legacy MS Windows XP, according to a document obtained by Betanews,
which has been getting its hands on some corkers of late. If genuine
the document is an AOL internal strategy memo listing "response
scenarios" to XP. Practically all of them are seriously hardball,
and at Contact th their most extreme they'd add up to recruiting an
OEM coalition to topple Microsoft from the desktop while Download
your Reg s destabilising the XP rollout.
Karsten M. Self <email@example.com> http://kmself.home.netcom.com/
What part of "Gestalt" don't you understand? There is no K5 cabal
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 232 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://allium.zgp.org/pipermail/linux-elitists/attachments/20010504/dbcb3f7e/attachment.pgp
More information about the linux-elitists