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

07.24.09

Microsoft’s Goodwill is to Obey the Law

Posted in GNU/Linux, GPL, Kernel, Law, Microsoft at 6:23 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Microsoft’s Linux code is from Microsoft, for Microsoft, which fights Linux

Love tag

“The government is not trying to destroy Microsoft, it’s simply seeking to compel Microsoft to obey the law. It’s quite revealing that Mr. Gates equates the two.”

Government official

Summary: Microsoft’s Linux module was made GPL-licensed only because the law required it after accusations of GPL violation

THIS will hopefully be the last post about an issue that we previously covered in:

A blog post that we linked to the other day revealed that Microsoft merely did what it had to do. It was a legal obligation, not a moral obligation. The pro-Microsoft folks wrote about it by citing the blog with the original claim.

As revealed by Stephen Hemminger – a principal engineer with open-source network vendor Vyatta – a network driver in Microsoft’s Hyper-V used open-source components licensed under the GPL and statically linked to binary parts. The GPL does not permit the mixing of closed and open-source elements.

This is further confirmed in Mary Jo Foley’s blog and there is wider coverage of this in Slashdot and OSNews, which chose the headline “Microsoft’s Linux Kernel Code Drop Result of GPL Violation”

To put things in the right order, also consider the headline from IDG: “Engineer: Microsoft Violated GPL Before Linux Code Release”

So, in hindsight, it was not Microsoft’s intention to release the module as Free software. Microsoft screwed up. Linus Torvalds responds to this too, but in his assessment he makes the mistake of comparing Microsoft’s patches to IBM’s. IBM is not the company which is attacking Linux; Microsoft is very unique in that regard. Why would Torvalds refuse to see that Microsoft writes code to advance the competitor/s of GNU/Linux, which is what makes Microsoft’s code different from code of Intel or IBM? Matthew Aslett says that “we should all be very grateful for Linus Torvalds.” We probably all are (I sure am), but this does not imply that there should be no disagreements at times. As Aslett noted:

Glyn Moody reminds us that there has always been a divide between purists and pragmatists, and that actually there is value in that divide in that debate helps expose weaknesses and refine arguments.

We wrote about this a couple of hours ago.

The Microsoft-faithful (and Microsoft investor) Synder daemonises those who warned about Microsoft’s code, so it’s clear that these folks are trying to bury something. Specifically, he writes:

In case you missed it, Microsoft has released 20,000 lines of Hyper-V device driver code to the Linux kernel community. The news prompted a number of commentators, including InfoWorld’s own Randall Kennedy, to go full-bore ballistic. You’d think the black helicopters were about to swoop down on Linuxland.

The other day we noticed the same type of denial in Beta News, which is typically biased in Microsoft’s favour. They are very specifically targeting critics of the big patch. It has always been self serving and it would be foolish to expect otherwise. Here is another interesting take on the subject.

Now ask yourself this question: would Microsoft have released their virtualization drivers as Open Source if they could have been included in the kernel as binary drivers? Probably not! (especially if as some suggest Microsoft had little choice)

The bottom line is that Microsoft did nothing out of altruism (companies are not like humans with compassion and ubuntu), so to claim this was a change of heart is to totally miss the point and to tactlessly embrace Microsoft’s PR.

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

11 Comments

  1. zatoichi said,

    July 24, 2009 at 10:31 am

    Gravatar

    Microsoft’s Linux module was made GPL-licensed only because the law required it after accusations of GPL violation

    Hold your horses there, Roy! Whoa, Nellie!

    That’s an overstatement. No one has the slightest idea that the law requires anything at all here, and it would take a court trial to determine that. I know it’s very tempting (and probably kneejerk behavior at this point) to paint Microsoft as a lawbreaker at every opportunity, but t’ain’t so, McGee.

    It may be safely reasoned that the GPL v2 license appertaining to portions of the composite drivers that Microsoft previously distributed required it.

    It can be said with a degree of certainty that accepted open source community practices required it.

    The headline seems to be asserting that Microsoft was in danger of breaking some specific and identifiable law here. I don’t believe that’s true.

    zatoichi Reply:

    Sorry, but it seems sometime that every time I look up, I see something new… I’ll try to save time for everyone by pre-commentating this one, using [square brackets]. Try to keep in mind that you mightn’t get to read the facts here otherwise, it might help.

    Microsoft was not “accused of GPL violations”, at least not as I read the story, although that’s been reported some places that don’t fact-check too carefully when there’s a headline at stake, like,say, here.

    What I understood was that Stephen Hemminger, found some sort of problem in drivers that were already a sort of a problem, being of a binary blobbish nature. He brought it to the attention of Greg, who had a chat with Microsoft about it. No accusation.

    And somewhat late-breaking news supports that sequence of events: Microsoft says that GPL violations were not the reason it released the drivers at all but because it was the right thing to do!

    Sam Ramji said, the decision to release was “not based on any perceived obligations tied to the GPLv2″, and that the GPLv2 was “the preferred license required by the Linux community for their broad acceptance and engagement”. (I’ve met Sam, and Bill Hilf, a few times, at conferences.) [Call me a shill now.]

    [SFX: Cue ]

    Vyatta Vice President Dave Roberts states that neither it, or principal engineer Stephen Hemminger, have accused Microsoft of GPL violations, as reported elsewhere. {like, say here, Roy} In a blog posting, Roberts says “news stories have started to circulate that have bordered on putting words into the mouths of both Vyatta and its employees”

    So, not necessarily a violation, at least not according to the folks who were supposed to have found this violation. ["It's a conspiracy!"]

    Roberts says “Stephen merely called the situation to Microsoft’s attention” and that Microsoft have made the right decision to open source the Hyper-V drivers. Hemminger says “once Microsoft was aware of it, they were eager to resolve” the problem

    So, there was a “problem” or an “issue”, but it apparently was not clearly a violation; and Hemminger didn’t “accuse” anybody of anything, he merely called the situation to their attention, and they were “eager to resolve” it, this according to Hemminger himself.

    [SFX: Cue ]

    [Accusations of someone having been "bought off"]

    [Speculation that Vyatta is "not really a free software company"]

    [Speculation regarding possible threats on the part of large corporations to people's lives and well-being]

    [Attempts to probe Hemminger's and Roberts' past backgrounds]

    [Random conspiracy theories]

    ["Troll! Troll!"]

    Thank you for your kind attention.

  2. Nemesis said,

    July 24, 2009 at 10:50 am

    Gravatar

    “The government is not trying to destroy Microsoft, it’s simply seeking to compel Microsoft to obey the law. It’s quite revealing that Mr. Gates equates the two.”

    –Government official

    Who was this “unnamed source” Roy, saying a “government official” may sound nice but does that mean you had a chat to the postman this morning. I know it makes you sound more correct and factural but just stating “government official” with no source or ability to confirm or deny what you are stating to be fact or fiction.

    As for and the GPL’d code, MS is a fairly large company, it has the resources to re-write any drivers it felt may be in any form of violation, also you honestly believe the FSF would risk a test of the GPL in a court of law against a group with pockets way deeper than the FSF’s arms ?

    I dont think so, the GPL has not been properly tested in court, the FSF tend to try to scare people into compliance with copyright law.

    I know here MS can do no good, but it must be hard for you to put a negative spin and FUD on anything MS, Novell or anyone else you dont like does.

    It’s a damn shame you cant /kick MS /kick Novell like you love to do to anyone that does not toe the Roy mantra.

    bixler Reply:

    “The government is not trying to destroy Microsoft, it’s simply seeking to compel Microsoft to obey the law. It’s quite revealing that Mr. Gates equates the two.”
    –Government official

    Who was this “unnamed source”

    This came from the Washington Post on Tuesday, December 8, 1998 during the US DoJ v. Microsoft anti-trust case:

    Gates Escalates PR War Outside Court
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/business/longterm/microsoft/stories/1998/gatesa120898.htm

    Roy Schestowitz Reply:

    And the law dealt with in this case is copyright law (GPL).

  3. zatoichi said,

    July 24, 2009 at 1:42 pm

    Gravatar

    That’s a whole lotta laws, Roy. Pick one.

  4. NotZed said,

    July 24, 2009 at 5:13 pm

    Gravatar

    Well, they could’ve gone a more permissive license, like 2 clause BSD or the like. I guess they see the protections offered by the GPL as worthwhile after-all … since they explicitly chose it.

    This might seem a bit of a far-out comment, but Linux is starting to become a quasi-proprietary kernel since they locked the GPL at an obsolete version of the license. Example, all the drivers are inaccessible to any projects using a more advanced license, and commercial vendors often lock their privates away in binary blobs too.

    And it’s the drivers which define the platform … after-all, apart from all the drivers a kernel isn’t a terribly large amount of code.

    zatoichi Reply:

    This is striking me as just another backseat driver demand that Linus do things your way on his project. I see problems with GPL v3; Linus sees problems with GPL v3; lots of people see problems with GPL v3.

    Maybe there are some problems with GPL v3, and the people pushing it the loudest have a vested interest in propagandizing a license they don’t actually understand?

    I’d be very interested in hearing from anyone who thinks they’ve got a good grasp on the implications of GPL v3, and sect. 6 in particular, on government-regulated and certified mobile devices, such as cell phones, etc. You need to be able to discuss cell phone-related legislation, carrier requirements, and government certification regimes intelligently, for starts.

    I predict a vast silence, but who knows? Maybe I’ll be surprised.

    The race is not always to the swift, nor the battle to the strong, but that is the way to bet.

    —Damon Runyon

    Nemesis Reply:

    exactly, ive read of alot of developers and managers specifically veto’ing GPLv3 code, whereas V2 is acceptable.

    many big groups like apache, MIT, BSD apple, google and so on have very little respect for the GPL and prefer to emply less restrictive licenses.

    and yes, probity, certification, QA, “neck to strangle” and the very fact that GPLv3 came about as a knee jerk reaction to a new technology.

    People dont want to live in fear of RMS and becoming the focus of his next campain.

    No one wants to be the next Tivo, or the next target in stallmans cross hairs prompting him to draft a new and more restrictive license to preserve his version of “freedom”.

    A freedom by the way that only benifits a very very small minority of the FOSS community. As basically no one hacks FOSS/Linux code. a very very small percentage of the total commuity. sadly.

    This means for most people the GPL holds little or no value.

    zatoichi Reply:

    …a knee jerk reaction to a new technology…

    Actually there’s a saying among lawyers: “Hard cases make bad law”.

    The corollary to this is that writing a license because you’re aggravated with a specific device is probably not a great idea. The “Tivoization” stuff in the GPL is probably the biggest problem in there.

    Of course, folks here likely don’t know anything about that. They think Microsoft violated the GPL v2…

  5. zatoichi said,

    July 26, 2009 at 10:33 am

    Gravatar

    Roy, are you planning on correcting this story, since Vyatta, Stephen Hemminger’s employer, asserts that you’re all wet about this, that there was no violation?

What Else is New


  1. Links 16/8/2017: Ardour 5.11, 24th Birthday of Debian

    Links for the day



  2. Links 15/8/2017: New LibreELEC and More

    Links for the day



  3. The Collapse of Patent Quality at the EPO is Inviting to Europe Some of the World's Worst Patent Trolls

    As troll litigation soars in Europe we must take a careful look at the sorts of patents granted by the EPO these days and the policies that support such grants



  4. The EPO is Paying Journalists For Trips Abroad and May be Buying Fake Twitter Followers (Still)

    The EPO's media strategy -- a nefarious strategy which is costing many millions of euros and is corrupting the media -- explained in light of recent activity and reporting (in German)



  5. 'US Inventor' is an Extremist Group Created by Watchtroll (Not Inventors) to Troll the USPTO for Patent Maximalism

    The face behind so-called 'US Inventor' (an anti-PTAB group) which enlists, apparently, a handful of people and does not actually represent American inventors



  6. Links 14/8/2017: Linux 4.13-RC5, PostgreSQL 10 Beta 3, GCC 7.2

    Links for the day



  7. Links 13/8/2017: DebConf 2017 and GUADEC 2017 Wrapups

    Links for the day



  8. The Farce Which is Nokia's Patent Portfolio, a Ripoff of Other People's Ideas (and Patents)

    The untold story about Nokia's alleged ripoff (plagiarism) of other people's patents, which are now being used aggressively in a shakedown campaign even against OEMs that distribute Linux



  9. Software Patents Help Neither Software Developers Nor Society in General. It's Time to Bury Them All.

    The idea that patents for the sake of patents (or increasing the overall number of patents) is somehow beneficial to everything these patents touch is misguided and detrimental not only to practitioners but also to the public whose work contributes to



  10. The Latest Evidence of the Demise of Software Patents in the United States

    Even though some software patents continue to be granted, courts in the U.S. almost always reject these, signaling the end of software patents as a potent tool (unless there's an out-of-court settlement, usually because the defendant is too poor)



  11. Growing Unrest Over Patent Trolls Goes Political

    Encouraging signs for scientists and technologists: The push for the end of patent trolling (patent assertion by parasitic opportunists against vulnerable people who cannot afford legal defense)



  12. Pro-PTAB Lobbying Leaves the Patent Microcosm Squirming, Lying

    The High Tech Inventors Alliance takes another step forward in its defense of the USPTO’s Inter Partes Review (IPR) process (reevaluation of patents at PTAB); the patent microcosm cannot tolerate the views of companies like the above, so quite inevitably a shaming strategy kicks in



  13. PTAB Crushes Another Patent Troll and Patently-O Scrambles to Defend the Trolls, Not the EFF

    The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit's recent affirmation of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board's (PTAB) decision about a notorious "Podcast Patent" continues to enrage and engage various circles of the patent microcosm, where it's commonplace to pursue exactly what serves to harm inventors



  14. Microsoft's Patent Troll Intellectual Ventures is Going After Carriers Now

    Another new lawsuit, this time in Texas (as usual), was filed a few days ago by Microsoft's largest patent troll, which uses a 'protection racket' business model to devastate everyone but Microsoft



  15. The Corrupt European Patent Office (EPO) Appears to be SLAPPing Judges Now

    The dark side of the EPO, which has culminated in suppression of truth-telling, as explained by the official report of the Dutch delegation to the Administrative Council (AC) of the European Patent Organisation (EPO)



  16. The Corruption of the European Patent Office and CIPO's (Canada) Participation in This

    Coming back from summertime with vengeance, the EPO's UPC careerists will use the Canadian Intellectual Property Office (CIPO) to spread their lies



  17. Under Battistelli, EPO Ceased to Reward Inventors, Rewards Only Battistelli and Fellow Thugs Instead

    Benoît Battistelli, who has turned EIA into an event all about himself (same as the EPO's Web site, now a shrine to Battistelli), has also damaged the mission statement of the EPO and lowered the quality of everything



  18. Links 11/8/2017: Atom 1.19, LLVM 5.0 RC2

    Links for the day



  19. EPO, Lufthansa, and the German Government - Part X: In Closing

    The latest and last part of this ongoing series regarding the trademark dispute in Croatia



  20. German Media Paints a Picture of Benoît Battistelli as a Drunken 'Putin' Looking to Push UPC at All Costs

    German media studies the situation at the EPO and issues a detailed report which is titled "They call the Boss (Benoît Battistelli) Putin"



  21. Links 10/8/2017: Tails 3.1, GhostBSD 11.1 Alpha

    Links for the day



  22. Switch is Becoming More Aggressive With Patents, Even Questionable Design Patents

    Switch signals the potential commencement of a litigation campaign (or at least shakedown), using all sorts of patents on designs (which are on shaky ground anyway)



  23. EPO, Lufthansa, and the German Government - Part IX: Potentially Fatal Injury to Air Plus Trademark Holder

    The Air Plus trademark holder, who spends many of his days in the hospital nowadays, and suspicions that there was an attempt to harm him and spy on him



  24. When It Comes to Software Patents, the EPO Has Become Among the Worst in the World

    Software patents, which were never meant to be granted by the EPO, are nowadays being granted quite leniently and easily (whereas other patent offices growingly reject these, deeming them too abstract and not beneficial)



  25. Sinking Patent Quality at the Brazilian Patent and Trademark Office (BPTO)

    The neglect of patent quality (and high-quality assessment of applications) is becoming a worldwide phenomenon, having already become the norm in Europe



  26. The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) Continues to Invalidate Software Patents, Should Tackle Public Universities Too

    A look at the latest progress from PTAB, which is dealing with almost 2000 petitions to invalidate patents every year



  27. Links 9/8/2017: Wine Staging 2.14, Brooklyn 0.2

    Links for the day



  28. EPO, Lufthansa, and the German Government - Part VIII: Outcome at DZIV (Zagreb) Miraculously Known Six Months in Advance

    The allegedly rigged process at DZIV (then run by today's EPO Vice-President Željko Topić) as illustrated by letters from 2009



  29. Adobe Speaks Out Against Patent Maximalism and Software Patents Are on the Retreat

    The momentum against software patents is growing as large firms which specialise in software -- even proprietary software -- speak out against what the US patent system has become



  30. Microsoft-Connected Patent Troll (Finjan Holdings) Goes After SonicWall

    SonicWall, which was a Dell subsidiary from 2012 to 2016, comes under fire from a company whose main 'product' is so-called 'intellectual property' (litigation)


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