02.28.08
Microsoft-funded Analysts Firm Pretty Much Confirms Software Patent Pill is in ‘Openness’ Pledge
“Analysts sell out - that’s their business model… But they are very concerned that they never look like they are selling out, so that makes them very prickly to work with.”
Yesterday it was stated that Microsoft had officially redefined “Open Source”. It is no secret that Microsoft has been trying to extinguish the GPL for a long time, so it’s important to be aware and fight against the aggression. Microsoft’s lawyers continues to work on their sneaky workarounds and take pride in media extravaganzas which then deceive the public. But this was all discussed before.
The news is actually about a confirmation from Microsoft’s ’studies buddy’, Gartner. The firm now ‘warns’ that Microsoft’s ‘openness’ pledge is a ‘potential’ patent trap. Well, most parties that include Red Hat and the EU have already known that, but hearing this from Gartner is almost like hearing it from Microsoft itself.
Open source developers who want to use Microsoft’s documentation still require a patent license from Redmond if the work is for commercial distribution.
IT research firm Gartner is warning open source software makers that Microsoft (NSDQ: MSFT)’s pledge to open up its documentation library to third parties carries legal risks for developers who aren’t careful about how they access the technical trove.
No *, Sherlock. In fact, watch this response from Horacio Gutierrez, who spoke to Peter Galli.
Microsoft `Wasn`t Pressured` into Becoming More Open
A Microsoft official acknowledges market skepticism, but says he is confident that people will look at the company’s actions as well as its words.
Microsoft was not reacting to pressure from the European Commission or anyone else when it decided to commit to a set of interoperability principles designed to increase the openness of its high-volume products.
So said Horacio Gutierrez, vice president of intellectual property and licensing for Microsoft, in an interview with eWEEK following the company’s Feb. 21 media teleconference announcing the move.
Short translation: Microsoft actually chose to pretend to be opening because it serves the company’s intention to run an extortion racket against its main competitor.
For other memorable quotes from Horacio Gutierrez, see [1, 2, 3. For all it seems, this happens to be the man responsible for intimidating large businesses which use GNU/Linux, to the point where they coughed out protection money and kept it secret. Don’t let Microsoft rewrite the rules of this games. They try very hard to do so. █
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.