Is Microsoft the New SCO?

khess 0 676 Views

Earlier this week Microsoft and Amazon signed a patent deal covering Amazon's Linux-based Kindle and its use of Linux-based server systems. Amazon will pay Microsoft an undisclosed amount as a result of this deal. I know it's just me but what the hell is up with that? I don't have a lot of details of this deal but why would Amazon have to pay Microsoft anything for the use of Linux on its Kindle or on its use of Linux-based servers? Your guess is as good as mine.

My guess is that this is more Microsoft FUD (Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt) forcing Amazon into a deal that isn't good for Amazon. I assume that Microsoft thinks it owns some patents for software used in Linux. My other assumption is that Amazon figured it would be more cost-effective to give in rather than fight about this in court.

What I also assume is that Microsoft tried to purchase Amazon and Amazon said 'no.' Microsoft, in turn, decided to exert some imaginary force on Amazon by "suggesting" that the two enter into this deal to "protect" Amazon from any future patent disputes.

Thanks Microsoft. That's so awesome of you. Always thinking of someone else. Thinking of someone else's money that you can tap into, that is. My question to Microsoft is:

"Are you the new SCO?"

It's hard for me to believe that you have that much to gain in these situations. And what's in it for Amazon?

To Steve Ballmer: Steve, come on, why can't you focus on making Windows better? Why do you either have to own everything or screw up everything? Do you have some sort of mental issue? I have some ideas for you.

1. Focus on Microsoft and making your products great.

2. Spend some time with your family. Consider retirement.

3. Consider a drug called Lithium to treat your manic depression.

Lithium is used to treat the manic episodes of manic depression. Manic symptoms include hyperactivity, rushed speech, poor judgment, reduced need for sleep, aggression, and anger. It also helps to prevent or lessen the intensity of manic episodes.

Please note the part about poor judgement.

If it weren't next to impossible to speak with someone at Amazon, I'd conduct an interview to bring you some details. I've given up on speaking with anyone there. They just aren't willing to speak to journalists even on nonvolatile topics such as virtualization, their EC2 offering or any other item of general interest.

Yes, again, something's rotten in Redmond. Who'd have ever thought that Microsoft could cook up something this maligned and ridiculous.

Here's the Microsoft business plan:

Everyone must use Windows and pay us a lot for the privilege. Those who don't use Windows still have to pay us a lot because we allegedly own the patents to the software they use.

I've never been to Redmond but it must be a wondrous place with constant rainbows, chirping birds, butterflies and a constant 72 degrees Fahrenheit. All except for Steve Ballmer's house. It has a dark cloud hanging over it.

What do you think of this "deal"? Do you think Microsoft is justified or is Amazon getting ripped-off?

Dani AI

Generated

Short answer: not the same thing as SCO, but a similar business-pressure effect. The Microsoft–Amazon agreement in February 2010 was a broad patent cross‑license (Microsoft said it covers the Kindle and Amazon’s use of Linux‑based servers) and Amazon agreed to pay an undisclosed amount — a commercial license, not a public copyright lawsuit. Cross‑licenses like this are routine in tech, which is why the Linux Foundation treated the announcement as “nothing to see here” while news coverage flagged the unusual public call‑out of Linux. (itpro.com)

SCO’s playbook was litigation-first: public claims that Linux incorporated Unix code, then lawsuits and an attempt to sell licenses to avoid suit. Microsoft’s pattern has been different in practice: it has pursued patent licensing arrangements and settlements with device vendors and OEMs rather than launching (widespread) copyright suits against Linux distributors. The outcomes may look similar to buyers — a payment to remove legal risk — but the legal basis and tactics were not the same. (wired.com)

Why people worried then (and why it still matters): Microsoft did not disclose which patents purportedly “read on” Linux, and critics said the company’s private deals could seed fear, uncertainty, and doubt that discourages Linux use in products. Commentators and advocacy groups urged caution and stronger defensive strategies rather than assuming the press release told the whole story. (redmondmag.com)

Practical takeaway for anyone running or shipping Linux today: document which OSS components you use; get IP counsel for product builds that mix OSS and proprietary code; consider defensive measures such as joining the Open Invention Network and following guidance from community bodies; and treat undisclosed‑patent claims as a business‑risk to be budgeted (insurance, counsel, design changes), not a purely technical problem. (openinventionnetwork.com)

References: ITPro coverage of the Amazon/Microsoft deal, contemporary analysis at Redmond/tech press, FSFE critique of Microsoft’s patent tactics, background on SCO’s litigation, and OIN’s defensive role. (itpro.com)

Be a part of the DaniWeb community

We're a friendly, industry-focused community of developers, IT pros, digital marketers, and technology enthusiasts meeting, networking, learning, and sharing knowledge.

Edit Preview