01.29.08
When You Can’t Make Good Products, Make Intellectual Monopolies
Microsoft development targets USPTO
When money is being lost, you can bluff. When key staff is leaving, you put a spin on it. When you cannot sell your products, then you stuff the channel, boast some bogus figures, and attack your competition.
Microsoft has found yet another method to concealing its problems. It signed patent deals with GNU/Linux vendors, lobbied for and defended software patents and started mass-filing for an accumulation of heaps of patents. There are two new articles that shed some light on Microsoft’s new strategy, which revolves around software patents (this was actually mentioned as an option a decade ago in the Halloween Documents). Here is the first article
Similar to a stash of weapons a player might rack up during an online adventure game, high technology companies for more than two decades have racked up as many patents as possible.
[…]
In November 2006, in one of its most controversial patent deals to date, Microsoft signed an IP cross-licensing and collaboration deal with Linux vendor Novell. The deal was roundly criticized by other members of the open source community who claim Novell sold out by joining forces with Microsoft.
Meanwhile, in September, the European Union’s Court of First Instance upheld a European Commission (EC) order that Microsoft license IP, including patents, required for interoperability with its products to competitors.
How about just using industry standards instead? Here is the second article that has it coming right from the horse’s mouth:
PressPass: So, what do you say to those who believe Microsoft has come to prominence by going it alone?
[Microsoft’s] Eppenauer: The truth is that we’ve entered into numerous cross-licensing deals and IP arrangements with other firms in order to share our patent portfolio, to gain greater freedom to innovate and also to mitigate any potential legal conflicts. Some agreements have even been with direct competitors, such as our November 2006 patent cooperation agreement with Novell, a leading provider of Linux and other open-source software.
Remember that this is Microsoft’s strategy. It cannot compete based on technical merits, so it’s important to understand its new alternate manoeuvre. Shown on the right is the man who sank SCO. █
“I realize the last negotiations are not as much fun, but Microsoft will have brough[t] in $86 million for us including Baystar.”
–Mike Anderer, Halloween Documents
Highlight: Novell was the first to acknowledge that Microsoft FUD tactics had substance. Novell then used anti-Linux FUD to market itself. 
Highlight: Xandros let Microsoft make patent claims and brag about (paid-for) OOXML support. 
Highlight: Linspire's CEO not only fell into Microsoft arms, but he also assisted the company's attack on GNU/Linux. 
Highlight: Microsoft craves pseudo (proprietary) standards and gets its way using proxies and influence which it buys. 
Highlight: The invasion into the open source world is intended to leave Linux companies neglected, due to financial incentives from Microsoft. 
Analysis: Xen, an open source hypervisor, possibly fell victim to Microsoft's aggressive (and stealthy) acquisition-by-proxy strategy.