Another company signs Linux patent-protection deal with Microsoft

Summary: After the Microsoft-TomTom patent-infringement squabble -- settled by TomTom paying Microsoft an undisclosed sum -- I was wondering whether Microsoft might be more successful in unearthing new partners to sign Linux patent-protection deals. The answer seems to be yes.

After the Microsoft-TomTom patent-infringement squabble -- settled by TomTom paying Microsoft an undisclosed sum -- I was wondering whether Microsoft might be more successful in unearthing new partners to sign Linux patent-protection deals. The answer seems to be yes.

On July 15, Microsoft signed a patent-coverage deal with Melco Holdings, the Japanese-based parent company of Buffalo Inc. and Buffalo Group. Buffalo makes network-attached storage (NAS) and routers, including the LinkStation and AirStation products.

Microsoft and Melco "have entered into an agreement that will provide Melco Group’s customers with patent coverage for their use of industry-leading technologies running Linux and other related open source software," according to Microsoft's press release. More details from Microsoft:

"Specifically, the patent covenants apply to Buffalo-branded Network Attached Storage (NAS) devices, which run Linux, and Buffalo-branded routers, which also run Linux. Although the contents of the agreement have not been disclosed, the parties indicate that the only financial consideration in this agreement is royalties paid by Melco Group to Microsoft."

Yet again, no official word whether Melco has agreed that its Linux wares are infringing on Microsoft patents. (I guess we'll have to wait for Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer to be that blunt, as he was, to Novell execs' chagrin, when Microsoft and Novell signed a patent-protection deal in 2006.)

Here's Buffalo's statement, courtesy of Microsoft's release:

“'We are very pleased to be able to work with Microsoft on this matter,' said Hajime Nakai, director and member of the board at Buffalo. 'While we plan to increasingly adopt Windows Storage Server for our NAS business, we also wanted to ensure that our open source and Linux-embedded devices had the appropriate IP protections. By collaborating with Microsoft on a practical business solution, we are able to provide our customers with the appropriate IP coverage, while also maintaining full compliance with our obligations under the GPLv2.'"

As those following Microsoft's patent deals with Linux vendors may recall, the Softies have refused to provide IP protection for customers of Linux vendors uing the GNU General Public License v3.

I wonder which Linux OEM will be next to sign on Microsoft's dotted line. I wonder, too, if Microsoft will ever go public with which of its patents it believes Linux violates. It hasn't done so in the past three years, so I'm doubtful....

Topics: Microsoft, Hardware, Linux, Open Source, Operating Systems, Software, Storage

About

Mary Jo has covered the tech industry for more than 25 years for a variety of publications and Web sites, and is a frequent guest on radio, TV and podcasts, speaking about all things Microsoft-related. She is the author of Microsoft 2.0: How Microsoft plans to stay relevant in the post-Gates era (John Wiley & Sons, 2008).

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Talkback

66 comments
Log in or register to join the discussion
  • It's only news if ....

    ... Google signs one.

    ^o^
    <br>
    n0neXn0ne
  • RE: Another company signs Linux patent-protection deal with Microsoft

    We can conclude from this that linux does in fact violate Microsoft's patents. Its no suprise since linux is known for stealing and copying others work. In the long run I have the feeling linux is going to get what they deserve and its not going to be pretty.
    Loverock Davidson
    • Which part of Linux

      I doubt the kernel itself violates any patents. At least, I hope it doesn't. Otherwise Google Chrome may be done for as well. But my thoughts are that some of the applications built on Linux such as Samba require a certain finesse that could possibly violate a software patent or two.
      nucrash
    • Loverock, you do know that Mike Cox is back, do you?

      Man, you sooo PALE in comparison....
      nizuse
      • Where is he?

        Don't keep it a secret. I knew the rumors of his death were greatly exaggerated.
        Viva la crank dodo
    • Loverock FUD

      The OIN (founded in 2005 by consumer electronics manufacturers Sony, Phillips, and NEC and IT vendors Red Hat, Novell, and IBM) holds over 100 patents on fundamental technologies underlying electronic commerce and Internet communication. Many of those patents cover essential aspects of Microsoft's own software. If Microsoft attempts to sue Linux users, developers, or distributors, the OIN would retaliate by suing Microsoft. The end result would be a veritable lawyerclysm that would lead to the legal equivalent of mutually-assured destruction. Should that occur, Microsoft may ultimately be forced to accept a cross-licensing agreement which would entail permitting open-source software to use Microsoft's patents in exchange for allowing Microsoft to use OIN patents.

      The OIN's willingness to use the so-called "nuclear option" gives Microsoft very little room to maneuver. Torvalds believes that Microsoft's real goal is to create uncertainty and doubt about Linux and that the company's recent threats have very little to do with intellectual property. Torvalds points out that Microsoft would "have to name the patents" if the company actually filed a lawsuit and that the company is "probably happier with the FUD [fear, uncertainty, doubt] than with any lawsuit."

      Show us the code.

      The OIN FAT-busting campaign is also interesting. [i]Linux Foundation executive director Jim Zemlin says that FAT is easy to replace and that the Linux Foundation is available to coordinate a technical effort to assist with the removal of FAT from products.[/i]

      http://tinyurl.com/cbdbzq
      Don Collins
      • Then why the Tom-Tom deal?

        Tom-Tom caved, and I saw no effort to invoke OIN.
        sorgfelt
        • Signed too quickly

          Tom Tom signed the agreement too quickly. A little stalling and they would have been out of the woods because Tridge has released a patch which works around the FAT patent.

          The FAT patent covers using 8.3 and long filenames simultaneously, while Tridge's code uses the 8.3 filename if possible, and only the long filename if not. It is an elegant solution to the FAT patent that only has a problem if you want to go back to DOS and Progra~1, which won't work in Tridge's system.
          daengbo
          • Can somebody tell me ......

            but I thought patents were issued for X amt of time ... after anyone could use your idea to manufacture wigits
            cammobus@...
          • originally, this is true

            but companies have paid to have the laws changed in their favors on these patents where they can practically keep the patent alive indefinitely if they so choose, by renewing them.

            DaemonSlayer
    • RE: Another company signs Linux patent-protection deal with Microsoft

      Loverock

      Who Linux, What Linux, Where Linux?

      Which group of virtually unpaid group of Linux Open Source Developers are you leveling your comments on?

      I am a user and adminsistrator (certified I might add) of Microsoft, but come on..
      Microsoft does not steal, the gobble up, crush, or over lawyer and competitor with new, fresh ideas/products.
      jtollack
    • Ha... In your wettest dreams...

      Don't get too excited LRD. you'll only be disappointed in the end.

      MS is only rattling sabers and doing what they do best... Scaring/exciting stupid people. We don't even know what the agreement was about. Maybe they licensed clippy ;)

      If MS had anything substantial to take down Linux, it would go to court, their patents would be named, and challenged. We all know they can't risk that because if they lose their patents, they loose the game of coercion.

      It's too bad they don't concentrate on building software rather than trying to pull down other parts of the industry. I suppose they are really frightened of what the other guys can do. It's sad really.
      awasson@...
    • Allegation

      Not truly proven on Linux infringements to M$ (if I'm wrong, show me)... but MS has a track record of stealing tech for itself.
      DaemonSlayer
      • absolutely right

        beginning with what MS stole from IBM
        maggietoo9
    • Spoken like someone taking a Microsoft paycheck

      Microsoft's Ballmer is (other than insane) a nasty, spiteful, greedy, thieving bully. You CANNOT conclude anything at all from Microsoft's bullying people into "agreements" to pay them extortion/protection racket money - Microsoft can be SCARY! - MS is truly the "800-lb gorilla" when it comes to threatening and intimidating others.

      Microsoft is HOPING that ignorant people will do exactly as you did - ASSUME that because MS succeeded int browbeating some poor scared saps into paying MS blackmail, that there was some "merit" to UNspecified claims.

      Linux is trying to provide free OS and software for people all over the world. Microsoft is a heavy-handed, greedy, bullying racketeer, out to help no one but themselves. All they are interested in is taking money out of yours, and other people's, pockets and shoving it into their own. I hope they BOTH "get exactly what they deserve: for Linux, accolades and appreciation and thanks; for Microsoft, a jail sentence for it's CEO's and MORE hefty fines, just as any other thieving criminals would get.
      maggietoo9
    • Got any evidence for that statement?

      ...

      Didn't think so.
      LeonBA
  • Novell gained in this matter

    Novell can now deliver Windows Domain Services with their OES server without worry.

    While I know this upset Jeremy Allchin and his Samba team, from a legal standpoint, that makes sense.
    nucrash
  • "The SCO Group"-pay us for protection!

    Now there's an anti-Linux protection racket that miserably failed, although they aren't quite out of business yet.
    DonRupertBitByte
  • *** BREAKING NEWS ***

    [b]<a href="http://www.theonion.com/content/node/29130">Microsoft Patents Ones and Zeroes</a>!

    Their Business Method Patents are worthless, read: <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_re_Bilski">in re Bilsky</a>

    More MS 'Smoke and Mirrors' and an unfortunate 'shakedown of Buffalo'.

    Dietrich T. Schmitz
    • Bilsky is about business method patents. This was about technology patents

      NT
      de-void-21165590650301806002836337787023