On mySimon: Michael Jackson's: This Is It
BNET Business Network:
BNET
TechRepublic
ZDNet

By Rupert Goodwins
Posted on ZDNet News: Jul 23, 2004 3:05:00 PM

COMMENTARY--It can take a long time to realize that war is in the air. Is that a sword being unsheathed or merely a saber being rattled? A field exercise or the first stage of mobilization? Are those defensive forces digging in at the border, or shock troops readying a surprise onslaught?

These issues consumed military planners during the Cold War, but they all boil down to one simple question: what is in the mind of the opposition? Until the first shot is fired, there is always an element of ambiguity in even the most offensive posturing--and you can be sure that an aggressive foe will use that ambiguity to the full.

This is why field marshals and CEOs alike rely so heavily on intelligence. It was information from the field that kept us from nuclear annihilation; we know to our cost how bad or no intelligence can lead even the most sophisticated governments astray.

On the other hand, one piece of critical information can crystallize an entire sea of murk. Like a flare soaring above a night-time battlefield, HP's leaked memo from June 2002 is just such a defining item.

Short, sharp and clear, it outlines HP's fears that Microsoft is going to war on open source through patents. HP knows Microsoft: it has enjoyed a close relationship with the company for decades and has struck many deals. When HP recognizes that MS has decided on a plan, you can be sure of that perception. The details in the memo--the open source products up first for attack, the thrust of the campaign to come and the implications for HP--will not have come from HP's imagination. Words will have been had.

But this was two years ago, and the promised onslaught has yet to happen. Could this be just another bit of MS partner management, a bit of internal FUD designed to keep HP on the straight and narrow without the risks of having to actually do anything? Is Microsoft's patent arsenal there, as the company has said, purely for defensive purposes?

Let's look at what Microsoft has been doing in the intellectual property arena over the past couple of years. It has embarked on a record number of cross-licensing deals, including some with long-term combatants such as Sun, and started to open up its intellectual property portfolio to anyone who wants to sign up.

It has registered, bought or prepared thousands of patents. It has settled many long-running IP cases out of court, never to its advantage. It's said that academics can use its IP for free. Are these the signs of a company settling down to being a good corporate citizen and preparing to play by the rules, or a company preparing to use the court and patent system for a much bigger and more aggressive assault? If you don't habitually license your IP on fair terms, you have a hard time convincing the courts that you're suddenly in favor of the idea: ditto if you're in the habit of aggressively pushing claims of questionable merit.

Most significantly, though, Microsoft has hired Marshall Phelps.

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

  • Talkback
  • Most Recent of 110 Talkback(s)
Come stand around and laugh at the clown
"Any view, other than yours, is delusional right?"

No just when the other person claims :

"I don't have a "position", simply looking objectively."

Then rants about the problems fa... (Read the rest)
Posted by: Richard Flude Posted on: 07/27/04 You are currently: a Guest | | Terms of Use
I read the "leaked" memo:  ickusslime@... | 07/23/04
That's the only way Microsoft can compete.  Xunil_Sierutuf | 07/23/04
4 years  Nigel Johnstone | 07/23/04
It is rather obvious Microsoft is planning an attack.  DonnieBoy | 07/23/04
Quite a legal battle  johnnyu | 07/23/04
Yes, Microsoft is between a rock and a hard place.  DonnieBoy | 07/23/04
Patents  richhayes | 07/24/04
Do you really believe that?  No_Ax_to_Grind | 07/23/04
Re: Do you really believe that?  alterego_z | 07/23/04
Could be, but AIX still out sells Linux  No_Ax_to_Grind | 07/23/04
Linux goes away tomorrow, and IBM loses.  DonnieBoy | 07/23/04
Gee, did they "walk away" from OS/2?  No_Ax_to_Grind | 07/23/04
They walked away because OS2 failed. Linux is not failing.  DonnieBoy | 07/23/04
Wouldn't bet the ranch on that...  techboy_z | 07/23/04
Or to put it another way.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 07/23/04
The IBM / Microsoft relationship is NOT one way.  DonnieBoy | 07/23/04
You MUST be kidding right?  No_Ax_to_Grind | 07/23/04
And times have changed. That was when Microsoft was cool,changing the world  DonnieBoy | 07/23/04
Remove the rose colored glasses Donnie.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 07/23/04
You think all is roses between IBM and Microsoft???  DonnieBoy | 07/23/04
Donnie, what do the VAST majority of IBM PCs ship with?  No_Ax_to_Grind | 07/23/04
And would what would IBM rather sell?? Linux.  DonnieBoy | 07/23/04
But they are...  Linux User 147560 | 07/23/04
Oops...  Linux User 147560 | 07/23/04
Incorrect  dsnyder_z | 07/23/04
You are so right...  No_Ax_to_Grind | 07/23/04
Microsoft profitability  georgep_z | 07/23/04
Small profit, big profit, all good on the bottom line.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 07/23/04
IBM  richhayes | 07/24/04
Because Bit....  Tim Patterson | 07/23/04
Patents and WTO treaties.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 07/23/04
Wake-up Bit  Tim Patterson | 07/23/04
Tim, there are other reasons  mvaar | 07/23/04
Yes and...  Tim Patterson | 07/23/04
I see you have much to learn about global economics.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 07/23/04
Treaties  tic swayback | 07/23/04
The difference is that IBM is not alone here, with OS2 they were.  DonnieBoy | 07/23/04
Good points Donnie  Tim Patterson | 07/23/04
One more time for you...  No_Ax_to_Grind | 07/23/04
You might argue it is fair to use patents to attack, but it is an attack.  DonnieBoy | 07/23/04
Again, you can NOT attack with a patent!!!  No_Ax_to_Grind | 07/23/04
You can call it what you want, it is a way to fight competition.  DonnieBoy | 07/23/04
No, it's a way to stop people from copying you.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 07/23/04
Doesn't matter at all.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 07/23/04
Any large company has to have a large patent portfolio.  DonnieBoy | 07/23/04
Yes, and it's all defensive.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 07/23/04
No, you can use patents / IP to atack, and for defence.  DonnieBoy | 07/23/04
What about this?  tic swayback | 07/23/04
Afraid not...  No_Ax_to_Grind | 07/23/04
tic, what is your question?  No_Ax_to_Grind | 07/23/04
Couple of things...  B.O.F.H. | 07/23/04
Good points, but consider this.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 07/23/04
Couldn't be more wrong Bit!  Tim Patterson | 07/23/04
Sorry, but no.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 07/23/04
Points considered?  B.O.F.H. | 07/23/04
Ok, lets take it a step futher...  No_Ax_to_Grind | 07/23/04
Regarding WinFS, Longhorn and licencing...  B.O.F.H. | 07/23/04
BOFH, your talking about one out of thousands  No_Ax_to_Grind | 07/23/04
Actually, it doesn?t matter all that much?  B.O.F.H. | 07/23/04
Actually, IT DOES.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 07/25/04
It is not Open Source itself but the corporations that release software as  B.O.F.H. | 07/25/04
You talk about this as if MS were inovating.  DonnieBoy | 07/23/04
Not your (or mine) call. Patent Office does it.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 07/23/04
Why is software different?  doodlius | 07/23/04
It isn't.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 07/24/04
Do you even understand how open source licensing works?  B.O.F.H. | 07/24/04
BOFH, you missed what I was saying.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 07/24/04
Hold on a minute folks, defending a patent is not an attack,  No_Ax_to_Grind | 07/23/04
You're smarter than that , aren't ya?  Tim Patterson | 07/23/04
The questions is, are you?  No_Ax_to_Grind | 07/23/04
Here ya go Bit  Tim Patterson | 07/23/04
I see your mistake...  No_Ax_to_Grind | 07/23/04
I see you mistake too  voska | 07/23/04
This is a good point ...  worknman | 07/23/04
Nope, not even close.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 07/23/04
Patents  richhayes | 07/24/04
But the laws have to be followed by both sides  voska | 07/23/04
Oh good grief...  No_Ax_to_Grind | 07/23/04
Well ...  worknman | 07/23/04
Impossible to say.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 07/23/04
Alright, try this one ...  worknman | 07/23/04
In this case yes.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 07/23/04
Did I answer your question?  No_Ax_to_Grind | 07/23/04
Prediction...now clear to see.  Tim Patterson | 07/23/04
One more time, you can NOT attack with a patent.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 07/23/04
So what SCO did is not an attack  Hanover Phist | 07/23/04
Ummm, we are talking about PATENTS.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 07/23/04
Right SCO case is contract dispute  voska | 07/23/04
Thank you.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 07/23/04
Substitute BTG for SCO  tic swayback | 07/23/04
Right strategy, wrong result...  techboy_z | 07/23/04
Pretty obvious  pj-xmesh | 07/23/04
You win the DUMBEST post of the day award.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 07/23/04
Aw, man...  rapson | 07/23/04
You'll have to work on tomorrows post Carl.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 07/23/04
why waste any keystrokes.....  pj-xmesh | 07/25/04
you missed something...  ryusen | 07/23/04
SaMBa does not use the FAT filesystem!  B.O.F.H. | 07/23/04
really?  ryusen | 07/26/04
Hmmm, I've read the posts and...  No_Ax_to_Grind | 07/23/04
It is impossible to understand your position  Richard Flude | 07/23/04
Actually...  B.O.F.H. | 07/23/04
I don't have a "position", simply looking objectively.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 07/24/04
hEh...  pj-xmesh | 07/25/04
What a childish post.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 07/25/04
Had nothing to with effects of behavior.  pj-xmesh | 07/25/04
You seem to believe your (and my) opinion matters.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 07/25/04
You're Delusional  Richard Flude | 07/25/04
Any view, other than yours, is delusional right?  No_Ax_to_Grind | 07/25/04
Come stand around and laugh at the clown  Richard Flude | 07/27/04

What do you think?

advertisement
advertisement
Click Here

White Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads