EditorsAbout the SiteComes vs. MicrosoftUsing This Web SiteSite ArchivesCredibility IndexOOXMLOpenDocumentPatentsNovellNews DigestSite NewsRSS

07.27.08

Microsoft Hates Apache, Wanted to Sue It, Now Wants to Ruin It

Posted in Free/Libre Software, GNU/Linux, Microsoft, Patents, SCO, Security, Vista, Windows at 2:54 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

The EEE theory

Yesterday we presented various possible explanations for Microsoft's investment in its direct competitor, Apache. It would be unnatural to believe that a commercial entity did this for goodwill alone. There is surely something to be gained; an expectation, condition, an opportunity. It is important to understand motive.

As expected, the discussion about this subject resumes, most notably in Technocrat (Bruce Perens’ site). He has been pursuing this for quite some time as he hawked Apache. His immediate instinct was negative and he now shares the story about Microsoft planning to sue Apache. As a high-level official, he knew something confidential.

And then I got stuck with keeping the secret of Microsoft’s plans to bring suit against Open Source developers, for years. All of that time, I felt that I was being disloyal to my own community. This finally came out after I was long gone from HP.

Microsoft backed SCO’s lawsuit after releasing this information to HP.

For information about Microsoft’s connection with SCO, start here. More recent developments are covered in [1, 2, 3].

The incident that Perens refers to was properly documented by Joe Barr, who was never shy to expose Microsoft’s bad behaviour [1, 2, 3].

The memo — its full text is provided later in the story, along with HP’s response — briefly explains a patent cross-licensing deal between HP and Microsoft. By itself, that’s not a big deal, especially since it was sent two years ago. But the memo asserts that “Microsoft will soon be launching a patent-based legal offensive against Linux and other free software projects.” Leaders in the open source community have been warning of such attacks for some time. The memo reveals there may be very good reason for the worry.

That’s the same HP that now has some level of influence/control over GNOME, engages in collusion schemes with Microsoft, spreads Silverlight (i.e. poisons the open Web), promotes Microsoft Web services, and lobbies for Microsoft's OOXML, essentially intervening with a process it should stay out of.

Here comes the interesting part.

Yesterday it was argued by some people that Microsoft could or would ‘extend’ Apache to better suit Microsoft’s business goals. Here is one newer speculation.

Ladies & Gentlemen I give you Web 2.0, the new and improved thin client cum cloud computing model where all you need to do anything is a browser and a fat pipe.

And what do browsers send GET requests to?

Penny dropping yet?

So Microsoft 7 ships with what used to be once the Berkeley TCP/IP stack for network communications and with what used to be once the Apache web server for Web 2.0, in EXACTLY the same way that Internet Explorer was bundled in the past, Web 2.0 requires a browser to be bundled with the OS and integrated into it.

When I say “Microsoft 7″ I mean of course every version from Microsoft 7 Embedded to Microsoft 7 Godzilla Enterprise Server, they will all ship with the default, ooh, let’s pick a catchy name, MicroSoft Internet Foundry, so default MSIE and MSIF neatly complementing each other.

By 2011 we can have MS in Court facing anti trust charges, but as with MSIE by then the damage will be done, and maybe Mitchell Baker will be doing a Marc Andressen and praising MS for embracing a Open Source code and making the net a better place.

To be fair, if MS had not embraced and extended the Berkeley TCP/IP stack the internet as we know it today would be a very different place, and that includes the Apache web server as we know it today.

In the meantime…

All your Web 2.0 are belong to us.

signed, MicroSoft.

One person who was in touch with us a few months ago predicted that Microsoft would ‘extend’ TCP/IP with DRM (or TPM). The DRM infrastructure and the wholly-new stack that come in Vista may only be a preparation for this. See this old article:

Researchers with Symantec’s advanced threat team poked through Vista’s new network stack in several recent builds of the still-under-construction operating system, and found several bugs — some of which have been fixed, including a few in Monday’s release — as well as broader evidence that the rewrite of the networking code could easily lead to problems.

If it’s not broken, why ‘fix’ it? Why does Microsoft rewrite the stack from scratch, possibly under the guise of “security”, where security means control?

Share this post: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Reddit
  • co.mments
  • DZone
  • email
  • Google Bookmarks
  • LinkedIn
  • NewsVine
  • Print
  • Technorati
  • TwitThis
  • Facebook

If you liked this post, consider subscribing to the RSS feed or join us now at the IRC channels.

Pages that cross-reference this one

5 Comments

  1. Victor Soliz said,

    July 28, 2008 at 7:48 am

    Gravatar

    I think, this is all about DRM and not about suing Apache, MS might sue Apache, one day but it will not be in relation to this. It is quite certain the priority here is not (MS’) imaginary property else they wouldn’t have accepted the L-GPL. You can say this is for a bigger, much more evil project…

  2. Aaron Farr said,

    July 28, 2008 at 10:02 am

    Gravatar

    You know, you could always just, I dont’ know, maybe go ask some of the Apache committers what’s going on rather than say, make stuff up. This is getting ridiculous.

    First off, Microsoft could ship with Apache software _before_ the sponsorship. It’s already open source. They get _nothing_ from the sponsorship money that helps them get the web server running on Windows, so I don’t see this line of thinking working out.

    The linked article is clearly just speculation and not even good speculation. You people need to work harder on your conspiracy theories.

  3. Roy Schestowitz said,

    July 28, 2008 at 10:30 am

    Gravatar

    Aaron, I never suggested it was about committal of code. I don’t think it is. Microsoft doesn’t commit to the Free Desktop either, but it paid a lot of money to Novell and it has been getting its money’s worth.

    You know, Microsoft has also been sending the Firefox team at Mozilla some cakes and invited them to Redmond to work on Windows compatibility (at the expense of time spent on other platforms). And then there’s Zend.

    People live and learn. I’ve seen Microsoft back-stabbing partners time after time after time. It’s not a charity and it’s not even ethical.

    I received this E-mail from a friend a few hours ago (partly related to this):


    Basically, SCO was baseless and is kept alive by MS funding and MS party activists. However, I’m sure at some point it became apparent that it could work if there were real licensing issues to be found. So: a short “truce” with Novell to spend 5 years frantically injecting licensed technology into every possible project. e.g. GNOME, Ubuntu

    Apache has been the major obstacle for following through on the strategy outlined in the “Halloween Documents” It keeps TCP/IP and HTTP on top. However, I notice that more and more MS shops are quietly (secretly) pulling the plug on other standards like DNS, at least in-house and behind the smoke screen of a firewall and ‘security’.

    One thing that just occurs to me is that this distracts from the catastrophic bank failures in Europe induced by ideologs shoehorning MS Sharepoint into banking without regard even to basic phases of software engineering or product evaluation. Mismanagement.

  4. Allan Frisby said,

    December 4, 2008 at 4:44 am

    Gravatar

    This sounds kinda kooky – I don’t disagree with anything you’re saying, but you have to accept that, businesses, as they have been doing for thousands of years normally try to uphold their interests, whichever way possible.

    This just reads like a conspiracy nut’s rambling about someone what may have wronged them in the past. The whole ‘Microsoft is evil’ is even more tired – there’s many reasons why they hold a 90% share in world desktops, the one that sticks out the most is that manufacturers and corporations don’t want to roll out organic, ever changing, open-source applications. They would prefer to pay an up-front fee for something that may not be perfect, but generally everything built for it ‘just works’.

    Just something to think about. Also, I am a 100% linux user, fyi. Not because I have something against Microsoft, but because it doesn’t offer me anything I can’t figure out for myself on linux.

  5. pcolon said,

    December 4, 2008 at 5:54 am

    Gravatar

    that may not be perfect, but generally everything built for it ‘just works’.

    Why then would Microsoft need the Mojave advertisements?
    Why haven’t they fixed Vista? It’s been 2 years and all you hear is “Windows 7″

What Else is New


  1. Harm Still Caused by Granted Software Patents

    A roundup of recent (past week's) announcements, including legal actions, contingent upon software patents in an age when software patents bear no real legitimacy



  2. Links 18/11/2017: Raspberry Digital Signage 10, New Nano

    Links for the day



  3. 23,000 Posts

    23,000 blog posts milestone reached in 11 years



  4. BlackBerry Cannot Sell Phones and Apple Looks Like the Next BlackBerry (a Pile of Patents)

    The lifecycle of mobile giants seems to typically end in patent shakedown, as Apple loses its business to Android just like Nokia and BlackBerry lost it to Apple



  5. EFF and CCIA Use Docket Navigator and Lex Machina to Identify 'Stupid Patents' (Usually Software Patents That Are Not Valid)

    In spite of threats and lawsuits from bogus 'inventors' whom they criticise, EFF staff continues the battle against patents that should never have been granted at all



  6. The Australian Productivity Commission Shows the Correct Approach to Setting Patent Laws and Scope

    Australia views patents on software as undesirable and acts accordingly, making nobody angry except a bunch of law firms that profited from litigation and patent maximalism



  7. EPO 'Business' From the United States Has Nosedived and UPC is on Its Death Throes

    Benoît Battistelli and Elodie Bergot further accelerate the ultimate demise of the EPO (getting rid of experienced and thus 'expensive' staff), for which there is no replacement because there is a monopoly (which means Europe will suffer severely)



  8. Links 17/11/2017: KDE Applications 17.12, Akademy 2018 Plans

    Links for the day



  9. Today's EPO and Team UPC Do Not Work for Europe But Actively Work Against Europe

    The tough reality that some Europeans actively work to undermine science and technology in Europe because they personally profit from it and how this relates to the Unitary Patent (UPC), which is still aggressively lobbied for, sometimes by bribing/manipulating the media, academia, and public servants



  10. Links 16/11/2017: WordPress 4.9 and GhostBSD 11.1 Released

    Links for the day



  11. The Staff Union of the EPO (SUEPO) is Rightly Upset If Not Shocked at What Battistelli and Bergot Are Doing to the Office

    The EPO's dictatorial management is destroying everything that's left (of value) at the Office while corrupting academia and censoring discussion by threatening those who publish comments (gagging its own staff even when that staff posts anonymously)



  12. EPO Continues to Disobey the Law on Software Patents in Europe

    Using the same old euphemisms, e.g. "computer-implemented inventions" (or "CII"), the EPO continues to grant patents which are clearly and strictly out of scope



  13. Links 16/11/2017: Tails 3.3, Deepin 15.5 Beta

    Links for the day



  14. Benoît Battistelli and Elodie Bergot Have Just Ensured That EPO Will Get Even More Corrupt

    Revolving door-type tactics will become more widespread at the EPO now that the management (Battistelli and his cronies) hires for low cost rather than skills/quality and minimises staff retention; this is yet another reason to dread anything like the UPC, which prioritises litigation over examination



  15. Australia is Banning Software Patents and Shelston IP is Complaining as Usual

    The Australian Productivity Commission, which defies copyright and patent bullies, is finally having policies put in place that better serve the interests of Australians, but the legal 'industry' is unhappy (as expected)



  16. Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) Defended by Technology Giants, by Small Companies, by US Congress and by Judges, So Why Does USPTO Make It Less Accessible?

    In spite of the popularity of PTAB and the growing need/demand for it, the US patent system is apparently determined to help it discriminate against poor petitioners (who probably need PTAB the most)



  17. Declines in Patent Quality at the EPO and 'Independent' Judges Can No Longer Say a Thing

    The EPO's troubling race to the bottom (of patent quality) concerns the staff examiners and the judges, but they cannot speak about it without facing rather severe consequences



  18. The EPO is Now Corrupting Academia, Wasting Stakeholders' Money Lying to Stakeholders About the Unitary Patent (UPC)

    The Unified Patent Court/Unitary Patent (UPC) is a dying project and the EPO, seeing that it is going nowhere fast, has resorted to new tactics and these tactics cost a lot of money (at the expense of those who are being lied to)



  19. Links 15/11/2017: Fedora 27 Released, Linux Mint Has New Betas

    Links for the day



  20. Patents Roundup: Packet Intelligence, B.E. Technology, Violin, and Square

    The latest stories and warnings about software patents in the United States



  21. Decline of Skills Level of Staff Like Examiners and Impartiality (Independence) of Judges at the EPO Should Cause Concern, Alarm

    Access to justice is severely compromised at the EPO as staff is led to rely on deficient tools for determining novelty while judges are kept out of the way or ill-chosen for an agenda other than justice



  22. Links 14/11/2017: GNU/Linux at Samsung, Firefox 57 Quantum

    Links for the day



  23. Microsoft: Sheltering Oneself From Patent Litigation While Passing Patents for Trolls to Attack GNU/Linux

    Another closer look at Provenance Asset Holdings and what exactly it is (connection to AST, part of the cartel Microsoft subsidises to shield itself)



  24. The Patent Trolls' Lobby is Losing the Battle for Europe

    The situation in Europe is looking grim for patent trolls, for their policies and the envisioned system (which they lobbied for) isn't coming to fruition and their main casualty is the old (and functioning) EPO



  25. Unitary Patent (UPC) is Dead to the EPO and ANSERA is Not the Answer as Patent Quality Declines and Talented Staff Leaves

    EPOPIC comes to an end and the EPO does not mention the UPC 'content' in it; ANSERA, in the meantime, raises more questions than it answers and IP Kat makes a formal query



  26. Why Honest Journalism on Patent Matters Barely Exists

    Media coverage in the area of patent law is still appalling as it's dominated if not monopolised by those who benefit from patent maximalism



  27. Patent Maximalism Around the World

    A roundup of stories or spin observed over the past week, mostly favouring those who profit from patents rather than creation of anything



  28. Links 13/11/2017: Samsung’s DeX Revisited, Linux Kernel 4.14 Released

    Links for the day



  29. Time for the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) to Disregard Rulings From the Eastern District of Texas

    A look at the latest developments at the Federal Circuit and some bits about Microsoft's extortion using software patents (even after Alice)



  30. Alice (De Facto Ban on Software Patents) Remains Untouched in 2017 and Likely in 2018 As Well

    The patent microcosm (people like Dennis Crouch) is trying to find cases that can contradict Alice (at the higher levels, especially the US Supreme Court) but is unable to find them; as things stand, suing anyone with a software patent seems like a losing/high-risk strategy


CoPilotCo

RSS 64x64RSS Feed: subscribe to the RSS feed for regular updates

Home iconSite Wiki: You can improve this site by helping the extension of the site's content

Home iconSite Home: Background about the site and some key features in the front page

Chat iconIRC Channel: Come and chat with us in real time

CoPilotCo

Recent Posts