Re: [Sheflug] NVidia on SuSE and the SuSE/Novell/M$ thing

[Lesley Binks <lesley.binks@xxxxxxxxx>]

Chris Warburton wrote:
> The clearest and least-flamebait argument I heard against the
> Novell/Microsoft deal was as follows:
> 
> Novell want to push SUSE into corporate environments, that means they
> need to improve compatibility with Microsoft Office macros and stuff to
> be taken seriously. Because of the nature of software patents they don't
> know whether they can implement this functionality in a 100% compatible
> way without infringing patents, so they get patent protection for their
> customers in case they do. That means they are not agreeing Linux
> systems currently infringe, but just that they can add functionality to
> SUSE that will infringe without getting sued.
That's what I have so far understood of the arrangement between M$ and
Novell.  Not that there aren't other solutions but companies have made
investment in one platform and they need that dovetailing within their
existing systems to exploit benefits of other systems.
> 
> The problem is that any additions Novell make to a GPLed project will
> need to be released under the GPL, which means Novell customers have the
> right to redistribute it to who they want, including non-Novell
> customers. Since these customers won't be allowed to run it legally
> because they are not covered, the Novell customer isn't allowed to give
> it to them as the GPL needs all-or-nothing compliance. Since the Novell
> customer isn't allowed to give it away, Novell isn't allowed to give it
> to their customer for the same reason. Therefore any improvements Novell
> make to GPL code which infringe patents can't actually be released
> legally.
To anyone.  Which implies that M$ have spent $440 million on what precisely?
> 
> Of course I understand the other arguments, but this one seems to be the
> most methodical in its explanation, whereas others are open to
> speculation (read: flaming).
> 
> Don't get the wrong impression from what I wrote above, I like and
> respect the GPL and don't see it as a headache, just that it sounds like
> one in what I wrote. Also I don't hate Novell, they are a business doing
> what businesses are meant to do, make profit.
As far as I am aware, M$ have been after Novell for a long time and
Novell have always resisted them.
> Consumers/users/customers/whatever also have a duty though, to make sure
> their freedoms and wellbeing are not trampled on by the
> companies/government/etc. This situation sounds good on paper, with 2
> opposing forces, but when the government starts working for the
> corporations rather than the people, and the people are apathetic and
> click through masses of legal crap thinking "I don't understand it so I
> will say yes" rather than "I don't understand it, why the hell should I
> have to wade through this stuff?", then we start to see problems since
> the companies are no longer held back.
This is already the case in the real world, chip and pin being a good
example where the real aim was to shift the onus of responsibility onto
the individual and from the banks.  Most people didn't take that on
board at all.

It is also increasingly the case that anyone who disagrees about
anything or actually looks at EULAs and licensing agreements before they
sign up for anything is considered to be wasting time and part of some
wacky 'out group' of society - which is a very easy mechanism to use.

I find I have to take a pragmatic approach and balance the requirements
of earning a living against any issues raised in any legal agreement
that is entered into.  If I spend time disagreeing with a license for a
particular piece of software then I may not have work that requires use
of that software.  In the absence of any other form of gainful
employment effectively I may not have a choice.

My biggest resentment of some software is how the data gets tied into
that program so that one is effectively forced to either continue using
that software or redoing a lot of work.

I am quite happy *not* to redistribute XP or Vista, fortunately Ubuntu
and others are easily available, and I am quite happy to use any free or
open source software on a Windows platform which can also be
redistributed to others using that platform.

Regards

L.


_______________________________________________
        Sheffield Linux User's Group
  http://www.sheflug.org.uk/mailfaq.html
 GNU - The choice of a complete generation