[Novalug] No FLOSS supporter will use SuSe? was Re: [Ma-linux] hell freezes over, and Microsoft, Novell join in Linux Pact

Jay Sulzberger jays@panix.com
Mon Nov 6 22:43:01 EST 2006



On Mon, 6 Nov 2006, Rich Goodwin <rich.goodwin@cox.net> wrote:

> On Mon, 2006-11-06 at 01:30 -0500, Jay Sulzberger wrote:
>> nd, of course, no supporter of free software will use SUSE.
>> SUSE has agreed to pay based on the mere threat of software
>> patent claims.  Novell is now acting in favor of softwrae patents
>> and against free software.
>>
>
> <puzzled face>
> Your statement that "no supporter of free software will use SUSE" got my
> attention.    What are you trying to say?  I, as an open source/free S/W
> supporter, actually use SuSe... on several machines.  And, I even paid
> for it several times.  Before I start parsing what "free" means ... ah
> nostalig memories right in time with tomorrow! ... I would like to get
> some clarification.
> </puzzled face>
>
> I presume you are referring to the statement "that Microsoft will
> provide “balance payments” to Novell, and Novell will pay royalties to
> Microsoft for the use of its intellectual property" when saying this is
> prohibited by the anti-trust settlement.
>
> <shrug>That is another interesting statement.  </shrug>

Payment by Novell to Microsoft for every copy of SUSE sold by
Novell?  Of course this is an illegal combination in restraint of
trade, and on its face worse than the original offense for which
Microsoft was brought to trial and convicted.

>
> As I have not personally combed the anti-trust settlement agreement to
> determine this is true, I'd tend to think that Novell's legal team would
> have checked this out prior to signing something with M$.  Why waste
> "good" money if it's not worthwhile?  That does not seem to compute in
> my eyes - without delving into things.
>
> I understand your hesitation and treidation with the agreement.  What is
> Microsoft's _real_ plan?  Excellent question.  I doubt that it is to
> help Linux... the agreement is likely to
>   a) bolster foundation to attack the GPL somehow,
>   b) agree against IBM/HP/... to pay some royalties for some YTBD IP
>      infringements and
>   c) erode RedHat's position in the non-MS arena.
>
> This said - I believe we should review everything _both sides_ say and a
> very very wary view.  But there could be goodness that comes out of
> this.  While we look for the bad - let's look for the good.  Then we can
> balance them and make a rational assessment.
>
> OK.  The NOVALUG mail list is officially back.  ;-)
>
> Rich

Please read the official joint announcement.  Novell and
Microsoft openly attack publication of free software because,
after all, Microsoft has not been paid a license fee for its
software patents.  No specific claim is made, of course, but
nonetheless, every publisher of free software has been formally
and openly and illegally threatened.  Ah, every publisher except
for Novell, which has agreed to pay Microsoft.

David Sugar has written on this new alliance of Microsoft and
Novell against free software:

http://www.freesoftwaremagazine.com/node/1851

We need not wait to determine "Microsoft's real plan".  We have
the formal statement that all publishers of free software must
pay Microsoft or be sued for patent infringement.  Novell has
agreed to pay.

Do not run any Novell product.

oo--JS.


>
> -- 
>
> GPG/PGP Key Id: 1B257AEC from pgp.mit.edu
>
> Remember, all Windows machines are, by definition, fault tolerant.
>
>              They run Windows don't they!!
>



More information about the Novalug mailing list