May 21, 2008 at 17:04Microsoft Patents vs. Open Source: A Year Later
Exactly one year has passed since the day when Steve Ballmer stated that Linux and other Open Source projects infringe 235 patents belonging to Microsoft: “42 patents relate to the Linux kernel and modules responsible for interacting with hardware, 65 patents relate to various user elements - menus, component rendering tools, interfaces, and the like, 45 patents owned by Microsoft Office were found in document processing and printing systems, 15 patents in e-mail systems, and another 68 patents in various programs, which are not part of Linux, but are actively used in it, ”it was said then.
And now, exactly one year has passed, and during this time Microsoft has not done anything to confirm or refute its claims. She did not sue, she did not show those parts of the source code that violate her patents, so that the Open Source community can replace them. None of this has been done.
Thus, the point of view of those analysts who claimed that all Microsoft threats belong to the “FUD” class is fully confirmed, that is, their goal is to create fear and insecurity among users of open source software. Such actions should have raised doubts among corporate clients, so that some of them could refuse to migrate to OS.
After a year, specific conclusions can be drawn. about the goals and methods of action of Microsoft, which throughout the entire time played the game “good cop, bad cop”, maneuvering in front of the Open Source camp, now making concessions to them, then again resorting to intimidation tactics.
And now, exactly one year has passed, and during this time Microsoft has not done anything to confirm or refute its claims. She did not sue, she did not show those parts of the source code that violate her patents, so that the Open Source community can replace them. None of this has been done.
Thus, the point of view of those analysts who claimed that all Microsoft threats belong to the “FUD” class is fully confirmed, that is, their goal is to create fear and insecurity among users of open source software. Such actions should have raised doubts among corporate clients, so that some of them could refuse to migrate to OS.
After a year, specific conclusions can be drawn. about the goals and methods of action of Microsoft, which throughout the entire time played the game “good cop, bad cop”, maneuvering in front of the Open Source camp, now making concessions to them, then again resorting to intimidation tactics.