Scorn FUD

Below are a series of commentaries I posted on Slashdot.org These were written in the context that Microsoft has claimed that numerous, and rather sizable, IP violations exist in the Linux Kernel as well as in other open source projects such as mail and the GUI. Before you get what is being said you must understand that there is a history of IP theft by Microsoft over the years and there were some rather notable cases that were just decided. By and large tho the vast majority of IP lawsuits involving Microsoft have been won by Microsoft's opponents.

A particularly notable one was Z4. They were a small company that invented a way to perform software activation over the internet. Z4 discovered the Microsoft was using their IP and contacted Microsoft. Microsoft, for all intents and purposes, brushed off Z4. Z4 filed a lawsuit against Microsoft to protect their IP. During the trial proceedings, according to the judge, Microsoft performed many acts of misconduct. These acts of misconduct resulted in Microsoft being penalized another $25 million in special damages above and beyond normal and punitive damages. The Judge noted that Microsoft had conducted itself in this manner with the belief that Z4 did not have the ability to enforce it's own rights. The Z4 case went to appeal and was upheld, including the special damages.

Another thing to keep in mind is that the FUD aspect of these claims are not new and whenever these claims are brought out the Open Source community asks that the IP in question be brought out so that everyone can see them for themselves and evaluate, correct, or abandon those things which are potentially in violation. What many readers might not grasp is that the open source community doesn't want to use Microsoft's IP. They'd rather know what they are and remove or invent around them rather than risk the fall out.

Microsoft's history has shown that they have stolen IP and have used that IP even when notified of the violations. Not all Open Source participants believe that IP is wrong or that it needs to be done away with. What most Open Source participants believe is that the ability to patent software should be made significantly more difficult.

Here's an example. There was an individual on the net who invented a way of displaying some content. After some time he found out that Microsoft had been using his ideas on their web page. He contacted them not to say that he was unhappy but to say that he would have preferred that they give him credit for using his idea. Microsoft, to him, acknowledged they were using his idea. Unbeknownst to him they had also filed a patent on the idea. When this came out they dropped their patent claim but had he not pursued this they would have claimed the patent and gotten away with it.

The difference here is that it seems that Microsoft is attempting to use other's IP and will continue to do so even when told to stop while those that they claim are violating their IP are told they are but are never told which ones are in violation.

This is an ongoing battle between Microsoft and Open Source but in reality there's a significantly larger issue involved here including possible libel, slander and even anti-competitive actions being performed by a court ruled monopoly.