Microsoft sabotaging GPL, claims Samba

By Tom Espiner, ZDNet UK
11 March 2009 01:54 PM
Tags: gnu, gpl, linux, open source, samba, tomtom, microsoft, allison

Samba project leader Jeremy Allison has accused Microsoft of trying to prevent people using and distributing software under the GNU General Public Licence, by forcing cross-patent licensing deals.

You can't use GPL software and do patent cross-licensing deals with Microsoft (or anyone, for that matter) that cover the GPL software

Samba developer Jeremy Allison

Allison claimed to ZDNet.com.au sister site ZDNet UK in an email interview last week that through lawsuits such as the one recently launched against TomTom, Microsoft was attempting to encourage licensing deals which are proscribed under the GPL.

"You can't use GPL software and do patent cross-licensing deals with Microsoft (or anyone, for that matter) that cover the GPL software," Allison wrote. "If you do so, you lose the rights to redistribute the software. That's the either/or choice that Microsoft is offering the industry — use our stuff, or we'll stop you using the competition."

The Samba open source software project provides software for file and print interoperability between Linux and Windows. In 2007, Samba and Microsoft signed an agreement that allowed the organisations to strike an interoperability deal.

Microsoft's suit against TomTom alleges that the GPS company infringes on Microsoft patents pertaining to Linux. Allison said Microsoft was attempting to use these suits as leverage to encourage cross-patent deals with other companies.

"We put our software out there for everyone to use under the terms of the GPL licence," wrote Allison. "Microsoft not only doesn't want to use it (which is their right, of course), but they are trying to prevent others from using it by these legal threats. That's where I take issue with what they are doing."

However, Ronald Zink, Microsoft's chief intellectual-property counsel in Europe, told ZDNet UK last week that Microsoft was not seeking to threaten the open source community with patent claims.

"If you think of IP and what can be achieved, IP can be used as a method of collaboration rather than a litigation-oriented approach," said Zink. "We have filed three lawsuits over patents, versus approximately 500 inbound/outbound [patent] licence deals, in the last five years. You might think of it as a currency."

Microsoft has claimed there are 235 patents that Linux software allegedly infringes, but the company has consistently declined to say which patents they are. Zink said that typically, patent licensing was done between companies and individuals.

IP can be used as a method of collaboration rather than a litigation-oriented approach

Microsoft counsel Ronald Zink

"We will talk about patents and how they relate to our technologies, but it's on the basis of private conversations rather than openly broad negotiation," said Zink. "We are willing to license on reasonable terms, and we have covenants not to sue open source developers or for research and development."

Zink added that the covenants, which also extend to those companies such as Novell which agree to cross-license, "give understanding and certainty to people".

However, Microsoft's patent moves may damage its standing in the open source community. Allison said that Samba will not trust Microsoft as long as the software company maintains and pursues patent claims against Linux.

"While Microsoft has started to sue companies for using technologies in Linux and other free software then, no, Samba is not going to trust them," wrote Allison. "Trust is a two-way street."

Microsoft has been making outreach efforts to the open source community, by working with Red Hat and Suse developers, and by working on interoperability. It has also encouraged companies such as Novell to sign licensing deals.

However, Allison said Microsoft's pursuit of companies such as TomTom for supposed infringement of Linux patents meant that the Samba community was wary of the software company.

Allison also spoke out about the TomTom case in February, saying Microsoft's move would alienate the open source community.

Advertisement

Talkback 16 comments

    Paranoid Anonymous -- 12/03/09

    Mr. Allison is free to choose his friends - RMS, Eben, the Sector 51 Roswell Alien...

    Msoft should enforce ITS property rights. If Tom Tom is stealing them, they should pay.

    Paranoid Anonymous -- 12/03/09 (in reply to #320125436)

    In this economy, every dollar counts and M$ is trying to leverage a weak opponent.

    Check out what's happening in ICELAND to get a scope of how M$ enforces its licenses.

    Linux will eventually prevail.

    bah! Anonymous -- 12/03/09

    you're an idiot "paranoid". that´s all.
    M$ should keep his corpmongering to itself.

    Funny Anonymous -- 12/03/09

    "Allison claimed to ZDNet.com.au sister site ZDNet UK in an email interview last week that through lawsuits such as the one recently launched against TomTom, Microsoft was attempting to encourage licensing deals which are proscribed under the GPL."

    To the best of my knowledge the FAT filesystem was never licensed under the GPL so I am confused as to what if anything this Tom-Tom case has to do with Open Source software.

    Sure it wasn't licensed by microsoft.... Edmundo Carmona -- 12/03/09 (in reply to #320125440)

    But it doesn't matter. The patent is not related to licensed code used in Linux to handle FAT partitions.... but a software patent. It doesn't matter if the code is built from scratch. The patent would still apply on it (if it's valid, anyway). This software patent BS is sickening, really.

    I meant.... Edmundo Carmona -- 12/03/09 (in reply to #320125443)

    The _problem_ is not related to licensed code used in Linux to handle FAT partitions.

    In other words, it's not a copyright issue.

    MS patents WJM -- 12/03/09

    If MS has these great patents, then they should tell us and anyone who wants to know what they are. The fact that after 5 years of screaming about them they aren't divulging them tells me that this is either an empty threat, or that MS KNOWS they won't hold up in court. And if they won't hold up in court, then this is a bullying game, nothing more.

    FAT patents weak Anonymous -- 12/03/09 (in reply to #320125442)

    They probably won't hold up in court. Note that lots and lots of companies make use of FAT (whether using Linux or not), and MS is suing only one--a company whose pockets are currently very shallow.

    The FAT patents are considered quite weak. They aren't even about anything serious relating to filesystems, probably because FAT as a filesystem really contained no innovation. What they're about is the lame scheme MS used to make FAT act as if it could handle longer filenames, to mask the fundamental braindeadness of having made it only able to handle eight characters plus a three character extension in the first place. This is patentworthy? Whatever.

    To Paranoid Jason Tan -- 12/03/09

    Yes microsoft SHOULD enforce its patents.

    Instead it chooses to tell us there are patent breaches but not tell us what they are.

    In effect holding them over everyone's head to use at some later unspecified time in some unspecifed manner.

    So I agree MS should move their bowels or get off the pot.

    darryl Anonymous -- 13/03/09

    Its a joke the GPL is what is being breached, nothing to do with MS, MS has a patent and your not allowed to put patented code into GPL'd software.

    Motto: dont steal other peoples ideas.

    start by not stealing UNIX and finish by not stealing MS's innovation.

    17 years and Linux is still a complete failure.

    SAMBA is scared and rightly so, no wonder allison is crying. he's next.

    If you dont like MS dont use their innovations, but you do, so get over it, face the courts and live up to you own ideals and the GPL.

    Keep in mind MS does not use the GPL, is its not their fault if someone breaks it, its whoever breaks it.

    and thats probably SAMBA as well, im sure samba can read FAT files no wonder allison is getting worried.

    All theif's get caught eventually, stop riding the coat tails of a successfull company and get over yourself.

    Here's an idea, try to innivate something yourself,, dont just look at UNIX or Windows and take what you can,,,

    FOSS is the laughing stock because of this, and after 17 years your still below 1% market share.

    Guess why !!!`

    RE: Darryl........ Anonymous -- 13/03/09 (in reply to #320125527)

    "
    start by not stealing UNIX and finish by not stealing MS's innovation. "

    MS only actual innovation was MS BOB, all the rest is copy, embrace, steal, extend extinguish.

    "17 years and Linux is still a complete failure."
    Thats why MS is shaking in the knees ? Is that why they go all out against it ? weird statement...

    "SAMBA is scared and rightly so, no wonder allison is crying. he's next. "

    This alone makes me wonder if you even know what SAMBA is....

    Its not based on a single shred of code my Mickeysoft, its a fully reengineered wire-protocol compatible version of the Server Message Block protocol. Not covered by a single bit of "patentable" and or copyrighted code my MS. Why ?
    Because the SMB protocol was created (as was SAMBA by the way) way before MS incorperated it into its OSses. It was created by Digital if I'm not mistaken, and originally called Pathway (or something).

    "and thats probably SAMBA as well, im sure samba can read FAT files no wonder allison is getting worried. "

    SAMBA doesn't do anything with filesystems, it doesn't care.... it uses the VFS layer built into any UNIX/POSIX and even NT/ OS/2 like OS.

    EPIC FAIL mr. darryl....

    how is the sky on your planet? Anonymous -- 13/03/09 (in reply to #320125527)

    darryl, you are so clueless, its painful to think that you are allowed to vote, drive and reproduce..

    FYI, Allison, Andrew Tridgell, the italian lawyers and 2-3 member of the FSFeurope were the ones who beat Microsoft's best lawyers in court in that landmark case. Computers geeks won on someone elses court while Microsoft spent 3.6 BILLION dollars to get Sun, Real and a few of the original plaintiffs to drop their case.

    They couldnt buy off the Samba/FSF team and they couldnt beat them in court.

    .Allison is responsible for one of Microsoft's biggest losses, but id be shocked if you even knew who he was or what the european court decision is about.

    As for the Microsoft sleaze/lawyer in chief:

    "If you think of IP and what can be achieved, IP can be used as a method of collaboration rather than a litigation-oriented approach," said Zink. "We have filed three lawsuits over patents, versus approximately 500 inbound/outbound [patent] licence deals, in the last five years. You might think of it as a currency."

    I know him. He lives in our neighborhood.
    He comes in to stores and boutiques and tells them "It would be a shame if something terrible would happen to this wonderful little bakery. My associates and I can guarantee that you will be well ;protected; for a certain fee.

    There is a word for that: extortion.

    Like every empire that crumblesl this wont be pretty. Wait till the patent troll king Nathan Myrvold gets in the act. The ex-Microsoftie is still quiet but is amassing an arsenal.

    Of course, this is a post-Bilski world now in the US. Patents arent worth the same they were before Bilski.
    Luckily, both the republicans and democrats will do what's good for the companies that put money in their pockets. And as we saw during the last dems run of power (besides the facf that they bombed twice the amount of countries as Bush) and their deregulation of radio, tv, media and banks, they will pay back all their benefactors at the detriment of the american people.

    No such thing as patented code Anonymous -- 13/03/09

    @Darryl or maybe it should be Darl.

    There is no such thing as patented code. Code cannot be patented only copyrighted.

    Patents used to require you to require you to produce a working model of a machine. Not so long ago patents on software and business process were not allowed in the US. Now that has been turned round by greedy monopolists and it is inhibiting innovation.

    Recent court cases show that the tide is turning against software patents. This together with the pathetic nature of the MS FAT patents gives every indication that Tom Tom can thrash MS in court if it has they money and resolve to stand firm.

    I see the hand of Monkey Boy behind this. The sooner he gets out of MS the better and gives Ozzie a chance the better.

    Patent Code Miles Bradford -- 23/03/09 (in reply to #320125583)

    Most of it belongs to Microsoft or M$ has paid for it in Court after bing sued. M$ should in fact enforce its Patents. The young developers today feel they can lie to the populace and give them broken code in Linux programs and the quality of the programs written for Linux is going down hill really fast. If I was M$ - I wouldn't want my softwares even associated with the rotten code being written by todays' youth.

    Jack Boots SJG - The Fat Baby Goose -- 14/03/09

    Microsoft is fully entitled to crush GPL and its open source competitiors under its jack boots, that is what freedon of choice is all about.

    A lot of what M$ claims as its own is stolen Graeme Harrison (prof at-symbol post.harvard.edu) -- 23/03/09

    As is the nature of things, file allocation tables pre-existed M$... and everyone who comes along adds a little. In M$' case it was how to work around its original limitations with the 8.3 filename length limitation. NTFS brought (like Linux) journaled entry to Directories/FATs (masterfiles)... which CAN add extra data security, but in fact don't in the way M$ implements it (by not flushing out masterfile updates when CPU time is spare) esp for removable drives, meaning under DOS1.1 in 1983 you could pull a floppy out after it had been written to, but in 2009, you have to pre-advise the OS that you'd like to remove a USB stick or removable drive (if you have written to it).
    I was on the team of five at Harvard Business School which invented the electronic spreadsheet (proper attribution being to my classmate Dan Bricklin). The work was released as 'Visicalc' and got Apple off the ground. But his ideas were copied into Lotus 123 (which later paid him $US2m) and then copied by M$ to produce Excel. M$ never paid a cent to anyone for this cornerstone of their Office suite. Also M$ Word was copied feature-by-feature from Word Perfect in the 1980s, again with no recompense. M$ networking was a feature copy of Novell, etc, again with no royalties paid. I think anyone being threatened with a patent case by M$ ought say they will subpoena Dan Bricklin, Ray Norda (Novell), and the founders of Netscape etc to prove what M$ has stolen over the years... We need it freed-up from this M$ control of what people might offer. Let multiple-felon M$ compete, but compete fairly.

Add your opinion

Latest Videos

Blogs

  • Darren Greenwood Telecom NZ savings damage prospects
    If Telecom NZ wants to have any of the NZ$1.5 billion the government intends to spend on its new broadband network, it had better think long and hard before offshoring 1500 jobs.
  • Array iiNet: The whys and what nows
    Last week the Federal Court ruled that internet service providers are not responsible for copyright violation by their customers. This is an important decision not just for iiNet, which spent around $4 million defending the case, but for all ISPs in Australia and, indeed, globally.
  • Array Govt, hurry up with releasing data
    A programmer scraped data from the My School website to make some really cool heat maps showing regions of smart schools — no thanks to the government, which didn't supply the data in any useful kind of format.
  • More blogs »

Tags

Back to top

Featured