Hi!

http://www.advogato.net/article/453.html

Check out this article I found on slashdot. Apperently Microsoft is trying to destroy the free-software community using a new method in which they combine patent-claims and software-licensing.
This new license forbids all implementations of CIFS (which is needed to communicate with windows-networks, SAMBA uses it for example) which distribute in source-code-form and which are aimed at other OSes than Microsoft's own OS, namely windows.

How will this go on? Will microsoft be successfull in banning the GPL and other free-software-licenses soon or are they being hit in return?

What do you think?
fabs

[ This Message was edited by: fabs on 2002-04-06 03:16 ]

The truth is. microsoft can't win against free software. They can only redefine their practices to fit in better with the reality of Open Source software.

If microsoft is depending on tactics like this for her survival, then perhaps the end of microsoft domination is near; these are just day-of-doom delay tactics

I also think that they can't win, and I say this as a normal PC user, and not as a Linux user.
OK, they can patent that authentication mechanism, which seems they already did. But it's stupi do shut out only the GPL. Now the samba project could for example switch to the BSL License, which isn't the same, but not too far away from the GPL.
I think that M$ is getting _really_ scared that theyr monopoly will fall shortly if the Free Software movement expands at it's current speed. Tho, there is reason for it to grow, and M$ doesn't seem to get that it has some reason.... if they'd see it, windows won't be what it is today
[addsig]

No, that's exactly the trick: it says any license distributing the program in the form of source-code.
fabs

I still think its somewhat ridiculous; if microsoft wants to enforce such a tactic, they have to go to courts where they may not get much sympathy. Microsoft can't do that because they are already percieved as monopolists fund of unethical practices.

Such tactics could stir up the antitrust dust again, something which I feel is simply not good for Microsoft.

But M$ must have thought of something when they did this... they know that that antitrust thingy will be taken up again if they do it, but they must have thought also about something else which would be very positive for them... if they only "forbid" using GPL for your programs in windows, way more than 50% of the windows software available will be gone .... This will indeed be negative for windows too if you ask me.
but maybe GNU/Linux is a way bigger opponent for M$ than we think ...
[addsig]

You mean, MS wants to outlaw GNU GPL?
If they are, I'm gonna get angry!!

Microsoft - What competition do you want to destroy today?

Thanks...

You mean, MS wants to outlaw GNU GPL?
If they are, I'm gonna get angry!!

Microsoft - What competition do you want to destroy today?

Thanks...

Well, atm they're prohibiting the implementation in free software ("IPR impairing licenses") of the new CIFS specification. If developers reverse engineer CIFS (note, they _must_ never have looked at the spec) and implement it based on their research it should still be ok...

yeah... that's what I've read too.... as long as you don't read the specs all the stuff doesn't apply for you...
[addsig]

Skip the specs... [addsig]

How do you prove, in a court of law, that its possible to write such programs (that work perfectly well with Windows)without having seen the specs?

surely the coders are innocent until proven to have studied the specs, not the other way round

seunosewa: Don't know, but normally somebody has to prove you guilty...

You are innocent as long as not proved different, right?


Whooooops...Yjo has posted that before

_________________
If you are the monkey, then who am I ??

[ This Message was edited by: MoX on 2002-04-09 06:47 ]

I dunno, but maybe in some countries it's just the other way around? :/
(_some_ very few )
[addsig]

Then it's no threat to me...unless Microsoft deducts me to one of those countries! [addsig]

that would be mad... like every newborn being put into proven until it's proven it's not a criminal

Not so funny

Supposing you code a a program using the specifications in question, and release it under the GPL. Then Microsoft charges you to court for using the specs in a forbidden way. To prove you guilty, Microsoft's lawyers only have to make and support the assertion that it is impossible to have written such a program without having seen the specs or reverse-engineered the program (which is also forbidden). Once that assertion is made and justified, then the tables have turned on you; it'll be your turn (or the turn of your expensive lawyers) to refute microsoft's assertion by demonstrating that it is actually possible to have written such a program without any form of contact with the specs or without "reverse-engineering".

Obviously, your lawyers will have to be very good (I doubt if they will be better than microsoft's, though )

Am not really up on the legal side of things: do these patents last forever? if not then for how long?

Lawyers lollipop!

With the first lawyer justice became a joke in my op... [addsig]

you wouldn't need to revers engineer the stuff... I think in many cases it would be enough to put a sniffer into the LAN and then just use those datas for the program
[addsig]