[Novalug] Possible Novell Ban on Selling Linux

gregory pryzby greg@pryzby.org
Sun Feb 4 14:16:01 EST 2007


On Sun, Feb 04, 2007 at 01:49:28PM -0500, Angelo Bertolli wrote:
> Ken Kauffman wrote:
> > Despite what impressions I may have hurled over the wall in the past,
> > I'm not an MS hater. I find the agreement interesting but harmful to
> > Novell.  I used to be a Novell guy and used to really enjoy working with
> > NetWare over MS Server products.
> 
> I wasn't referring to anyone on this list ;)  I just meant the way the
> articles made the whole situation sound like Microsoft was trying to
> somehow "steal" Linux or make it unusable through patent law.  Thanks
> for your comments--they put the whole situation into a much more
> reasonable light.

Tin-foil hat crowd (not that there are wrong!). There was actually an
articel recently about a government project to project thoughts in the
Washington Post magazine. There is funding but nobody knows if it
is/was successful.

> > The DRM-like lock down of Vista and increased licensing restrictions
> > simply do not jive with the "share and share alike" spirit they have
> > extended to Novell.
> 
> I agree.  But this is always a "problem" with Linux.  That's just the
> way things go with intellectual property:  if someone comes up with
> something significantly new, they can make a patent and you don't get to
> use it for a while.  The only real problem is how the patent office
> awards or denies entries based on their knowledge of the content.  But
> that's totally outside of the scope.

:)

> All MS is really doing (if anything) is giving the rest of the world to
> permission to copy (under the GPL) the patented-laden stuff.  Or are you
> allowed to write a kernel module (like for a filesystem) without putting
> it under the GPL?

NO. MSoft has said they will not sue users of Novell's SUSE Linux.
They made no such promise to anyone else, and that is the issue.

You can write ANYTHING you want at ANY level (kernel to userspace) and
license it how you want as long as you respect the licenses as
appropriate for anything you use. 

So, you can write a proprietary linux module. That is called 'tainting
the kernel'. 

If you are doing it for yourself or your organization, you don't have
to provide anything to anyone. 

But, IANAL.

> > There's nothing wrong with this approach except that Novell has violated
> > the spirit of the community.  It was mentioned that the interop will be
> > contributed back to the community.  However, what protections does a
> > company like RedHat have by incorporating this into their software which
> > is part of the business?
> 
> Well, if the stuff is put under the GPL, then I guess RedHat has the
> right to modify that source code and improve on it.  Who knows, maybe MS
> is trying to get everyone else to actually write WinFS for them.  Since
> Linux is open source, MS could have hired a team inside its own
> institution and created MSLinux instead.  Who knows why they chose Novell.

That appeared to be something that was tried in the past. No idea what
ever became of it.

> > The problem is their is a track history by MS of embracing and
> > extinguishing and there really is a lot of uncertainty surrounding it.
> >
> > It's like inviting a "known wolf" into the hen house who promises not to
> > eat the chickens AND will feed and care for them.  It goes against
> > instinct to allow the wolf in, but now he IS in.  So, now it's a wait
> > and see game with much much doubt.
> 
> I think can certainly understand the mistrust people have of the
> situation, and how some people might be disappointed with Novell for
> cooperating with MS.  I don't think we should embrace the agreement or
> be OK with Microsoft now, but I do think we should be confident in the
> GPL and how well it can hold up against hostilities.  It seems to me
> that the only chicken that MS might have a legal right to eat in the
> future is Novell.  I mean Novell may be hurting themselves by getting
> too tied in with MS.

Yep. The pain is already there ala Jeremy Allison. Others have left
also.

> Then again, maybe I'm being too naive about this whole thing and MS
> really is planning on a legal battle.  It's not like the courts are
> always perfectly just and fair.  Sometimes it just depends on who has
> the best lawyers.
> 
> One thing is for certain:  Linux is too big of a market now for MS not
> to try to get involved somehow.

-- 
greg pryzby                              greg at pryzby dot org
fingerprint: 8A1A DB90 869F 5DD1 D6E9 EEB6 C156 6B04 849F A86F
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <https://lists.firemountain.net/pipermail/novalug/attachments/20070204/6cfcc407/attachment.asc>


More information about the Novalug mailing list