On TV.com: Dollhouse CANCELED, What Went Wrong?
BNET Business Network:
BNET
TechRepublic
ZDNet

October 17th, 2007

Microsoft claims it is not party to patent claims against Linux

Posted by Paula Rooney @ 7:36 am

Categories: Distributions, FOSS, GPL, General, IBM, Infrastructure, Legal, Linux, Patents

Tags: Patent, Microsoft Corp., Acacia, Litigation, Linux, Open Source, Business Operations, Operating Systems, Software, Paula Rooney

In Focus » See more posts on: Microsoft Novell

Contrary to speculation, Microsoft is not behind the patent litigation filed against Linux distributors last week, the company insists.

“Microsoft is not a party to Acacia’s lawsuit against Red Hat and Novell, nor are we involved in any way in this litigation,” according to an official statement from the company, released Tuesday by Microsoft spokesman Mark Martin.

Industry pundits speculated about Microsoft’s possible role in the case in light of predictions about patent litigation made by chief executive Steve Ballmer earlier this month and the appointment of Microsoft’s former general manager of IP licensing — Brad Brunell –to Acacia’s top management team just days before the lawsuit was filed. Brunell’s new job was announced on October 1 and the case was filed on October 9.

Other events have contributed to the speculation. In May, Microsoft’s chief IP attorney claimed that Linux violated more than 40 of its patents and that open source software more generally violated 235 of its patents.

In July, Microsoft Director of Mobile & Embedded (MED) Division Jonathan Taub, also a former IP attorney with Covington & Burling in Wash, D.C., left the software giant and joined Acacia as vice president. Contacted at Acacia, Taub declined to comment. “I honestly have nothing to add,” Taub said during a brief phone call. “I really don’t want to create spin that’s not there.”

So we should chaulk all of this up to coincidence?

In a nutshell, yes. When asked to comment on the coincidences and timing of Ballmer’s comments, the Microsoft spokesman reiterated that “Microsoft is not involved in any way in this litigation” and hinted that should “address any questions of coincidence or timing.”

Observers may not have all the facts but there is ample reason to be suspicious. Microsoft originally claimed that it played no part in SCO’s litigation against IBM but it was later revealed that the software giant indirectly handed off $50 million to SCO through BayShore Capital.

Paula RooneyPaula Rooney is a Boston-based writer who has followed the tech industry for almost two decades. See her full profile and disclosure of her industry affiliations.

Email Paula Rooney

Subscribe to Linux and Open Source via Email alerts or RSS.

  • Talkback
  • Most Recent of 74 Talkback(s)
Perhaps
Jonathan Taub and Brad Brunell both no longer work at Microsoft, while they themselves may have added some encouragement to the lawsuit due to bias gained from their past employment at Microsoft indee... (Read the rest)
Posted by: John Musbach Posted on: 11/13/07 You are currently: a Guest | | Terms of Use
Time will tell whether MS are telling the truth  John L. Ries | 10/17/07
In any case, patent suites will tend to clean up Linux over time and remove  DonnieBoy | 10/17/07
Ah, so you accept that Linux needs to be "cleaned up"  No_Ax_to_Grind | 10/17/07
Right, with all of the garbage patents out there that will be invalidated,  DonnieBoy | 10/17/07
I can understand your "HOPING" it works out  No_Ax_to_Grind | 10/17/07
It will not help Microsft it Red Hat hast to pay millions. But, in the end  DonnieBoy | 10/17/07
Sure it does...  No_Ax_to_Grind | 10/17/07
If any IP questoins are taken care of one at a time, that does NOT benifit  DonnieBoy | 10/17/07
Well, it looks like  No_Ax_to_Grind | 10/17/07
In any case, if this were closed source, you could attach to the assets of  DonnieBoy | 10/17/07
And I am betting  No_Ax_to_Grind | 10/17/07
Beware your betting, Axey  Sabz5150 | 10/18/07
GPL in microsoft?  davidaforshaw@... | 10/18/07
Never said that it wasn't  John L. Ries | 10/17/07
Again,  No_Ax_to_Grind | 10/17/07
Again, this is all related news since it is all about patents and Linux.  DonnieBoy | 10/17/07
Again, you do not need to be a legal exper to understand what is vague.  DonnieBoy | 10/17/07
Again, winning a lawsuit does not instantly make things that were vague and  DonnieBoy | 10/17/07
Me thinks thou dost protest too much.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 10/17/07
No protesting, just noting the reality of the situation. The reality is we  DonnieBoy | 10/17/07
What a joke  ChMacQueen@... | 10/18/07
Operation has been initiated...  Mike Cox | 10/17/07
Wow.  James T. Kirk | 10/17/07
Drum roll...10  D. T. Schmitz | 10/17/07
9.0 (NT)  P. Douglas | 10/17/07
9.0  BanjoPaterson | 10/17/07
9.5, but no fish --- so far...  Basic Logic | 10/17/07
If I were conspiracy-minded  rapson | 10/17/07
Since this could backfire, I wonder if Microsoft really wanted it. For the  DonnieBoy | 10/17/07
Junk patents ...  George Mitchell | 10/17/07
speaking of junk patents  Jack-Booted EULA | 10/17/07
You base that on what???  No_Ax_to_Grind | 10/17/07
You don't have to be a patent lawyer to realize vague general patents when  DonnieBoy | 10/17/07
No, you don't, but it sure helps  No_Ax_to_Grind | 10/17/07
Read the patents, they are very questionable, very general.  DonnieBoy | 10/17/07
Is that your "legal" opinion?  No_Ax_to_Grind | 10/17/07
And, we do NOT need "real" courts or "real" jurys to understand a patent is  DonnieBoy | 10/17/07
Sorry, but the law says you do.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 10/17/07
Court rulings to not make vague and general patents suddenly  DonnieBoy | 10/17/07
It really makes no difference what a "real court" and "real jury" say ....  George Mitchell | 10/17/07
Re: Since this could backfire, I wonder if Microsoft really wanted it. For  none none | 10/17/07
This case is just full of coincidences!  George Mitchell | 10/17/07
Shouldn't that be grounds for recusing the judge?  Tony Agudo | 10/17/07
Good point  John L. Ries | 10/17/07
In almost all cases, that is up to the judge.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 10/17/07
Prudent businessmen choose the cost effective solution ...  George Mitchell | 10/17/07
there's a saying about Danegeld  A.Lizard | 10/18/07
In this case, however...  Tony Agudo | 10/17/07
Actually, it's a good strategy to let it go  maldain | 10/19/07
How does it matter either way?  No_Ax_to_Grind | 10/17/07
If a connection could be proved, there would be a lot of negative press  DonnieBoy | 10/17/07
Negative press with WHO?  No_Ax_to_Grind | 10/17/07
Glad you think that MS is immune to negative press. Meanwhile, about every  DonnieBoy | 10/17/07
ROTFLMAO  No_Ax_to_Grind | 10/17/07
Negative press for "picking" on Linux???  No_Ax_to_Grind | 10/17/07
Getting caught lying would NOT be good for Microsoft. Companies DO need to  DonnieBoy | 10/17/07
Sorry but again you are wrong.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 10/17/07
interesting question...  sj_z | 10/18/07
I'm not conspiracy-minded  DemonX | 10/17/07
To the curious co-incidence of the Ballmer at the conference.  BanjoPaterson | 10/17/07
Uh huh ... Sure ... Yeah ...  OButterball | 10/17/07
Microsoft said the same about SCO  shoktai@... | 10/17/07
Ever played chess?  Sabz5150 | 10/18/07
YEAH RIGHT  kokuryu | 10/17/07
Acacia, a troublemaker organization  OKJoe | 10/17/07
What doe they mean by "a party"?  john_whitfield@... | 10/17/07
All patents must die [nt]  Omch'Ar | 10/17/07
RE: MS too precious by half  rkhalloran | 10/18/07
RE: OIN patent protection?  rkhalloran | 10/18/07
Microsoft does not accuse ...  msdead | 10/18/07
RE: Microsoft claims it is not party to patent claims against Linux  k.ide@... | 10/21/07
regardless of the merrit  Altotus | 10/22/07
woops  Altotus | 10/22/07
Perhaps  John Musbach | 11/13/07

What do you think?

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

advertisement

Recent Entries

Archives

Favorite Links

ZDNet Blogs

White Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

SmartPlanet

Click Here