This page permanently redirects to gemini://gemini.techrights.org/2009/07/24/microsoft-gpl-compliance/.
Posted in GNU/Linux, Kernel, Microsoft, Novell, Patents, Red Hat, Servers, Virtualisation at 6:07 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Summary: Microsoft’s loadable module had to be GPL licensed, but Microsoft asserts that it was compliant from the get-go
THE news about Microsoft’s Linux module simply won’t stop. We wrote about this in:
Verdict on Microsoft’s Linux Patch: Embrace, Extend, and AssimilateMore Self-serving, Lockin-oriented GPL Code from MicrosoftWhy Linux Did Not Need Microsoft’s Code InjectionRed Hat Asks Microsoft to Stop the Patent Racketeering
The claim that Microsoft complied after GPL violations is now being refuted by Vyatta’s management. Microsoft agrees.
=> claim that Microsoft complied after GPL violations | ↺ refuted by Vyatta’s management
Reports that Microsoft had to release the Hyper-V Linux Integration Components (LinuxIC) under the GPLv2 because they had violated the GPL have been rebutted by Microsoft and Vyatta. Vyatta had been referenced by reports as the source of the accusation.
This debunks some more reports such as this one, but it remains true that Novell was a notable collaborator. From Silicon.com:
=> ↺ this one | ↺ Novell was a notable collaborator
What made Microsoft open up to Linux? Ask Novell[...]Microsoft’s move to offer several Linux drivers owes a lot to a key programmer at Novell.
More here:
=> ↺ here
Microsoft’s chief ally in the Linux realm, Novell, helped the software giant work with the Linux kernel community.
Vincent Danen asks, “What’s in it for them?” [for Microsoft]
As rudely as always, Microsoft defends its racketeering practices. SoftPedia does them a favour by printing what seems like a propaganda piece against Red Hat. This also includes a partial list of companies that participate in the Linux racket.
=> ↺ a propaganda piece against Red Hat
Novell stands out from the crowd of Linux vendors that have inked IP assurance agreements with Microsoft, but there are others, including Xandros, TurboLinux, Samsung, LG Electronics, Fuji-Xerox, Brother, TomTom and Kyocera Mita.
IDG approaches some routinely-Microsoft-hired analysts who pretend that Microsoft has changed. Even IDC, which is affiliated with IDG, gets quoted. It is the usual PR routine. Just the other day, the same writer, John Fontana, neglected to put TomTom in the timeline of Microsoft’s attitude towards Linux and instead gave the impression that things were improving. Selectivity can achieve a lot when it comes to reviewed history. Many nations selectively remember their better moments from the past and don’t teach the embarrassments at schools. █
=> ↺ approaches some routinely-Microsoft-hired analysts
“That’s extortion and we should call it what it is. To say, as Ballmer did, that there is undisclosed balance sheet liability, that’s just extortion and we should refuse to get drawn into that game. On the other side, if Microsoft is concerned about its intellectual property, there is no one in the free software community that wants to violate anyone’s IP. Disclose the patents and we’ll fix the code. Alternatively, move on.”
–Mark Shuttleworth
Share in other sites/networks: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
Permalink Send this to a friend
=> Permalink | ↺ Send this to a friend
=> Techrights
➮ Sharing is caring. Content is available under CC-BY-SA.
text/gemini;lang=en-GBThis content has been proxied by September (ba2dc).