Microsoft Australia's competitive strategy manager, Martin Gregory, who made the comment in a briefing with ZDNet Australia journalists on earlier this week, declined to elaborate on which movies he was thinking of, but acknowledged the area "was one of those subjects written around with emotion and combative language".
Microsoft licensed from SCO the Unix source code and a patent associated with the Unix operating system. Microsoft general counsel Brad Smith said when the decision was announced that acquiring the license from SCO "[was] representative of Microsoft's ongoing commitment to respecting intellectual property and the IT community's healthy exchange of IP through licensing. This helps to ensure IP compliance across Microsoft solutions and supports our efforts around existing products like Services for Unix that further Unix interoperability".
However, according to U.S.-based analysts, Microsoft's move lends prominent backing to SCO's intellectual property claims and helps the software heavyweight combat Linux, which poses a growing marketplace threat to its Windows operating system. SCO has sued IBM for US$1 billion for allegedly inappropriately using Unix code in the Linux operating system.
U.S.-based Illuminata analyst Gordon Haff told ZDNet Australia's parent company, CNET News.com, that the license allowed Microsoft "to leverage the fear, uncertainty and doubt that is moving around Linux".
Other open-source community representatives have charged that Microsoft is behind SCO's legal push.
The following comments on what Microsoft's strategy to
target Linux, came from the leaked document reproduced from a Microsoft-internal Linux Strategic Review. It shows that Microsoft's best attack vector is to help make Linux appear a walking patent violation.
Bear these comments in mind when considering Microsoft's recent funding of SCO.
It would be great to hear the Australian Microsoft rep respond to the tactics denoted implied here.
source: http://www.opensource.org/halloween/halloween7.php
"Direct attacks of OSS and Linux are NOT highly effective. Messaging that discusses possible Linux patent violations, pings the OSS development process for lacking accountability, raises the specter of possible security flaws, and the like are only marginally effective in driving unfavorable opinions around OSS and Linux, and in some cases backfire. On the other hand 'positive' OSS and Linux messaging, i.e. access to the source code, the price, lower TCO, the ability to freely make copies, and the like drive very favorable opinions around OSS and Linux, both across geographies and audiences."
"Linux patent violations/risk of being sued" struck a chord with US and Swedish respondents. Seventy-four percent (74%) of Americans and 82% of Swedes stated that the risk of being sued over Linux patent violations made them feel less favorable towards Linux. This was the only message that had a strong impact with any audience."