Doing the Microsoft patent math

Summary: Just over a year ago, Microsoft officials threw down the patent gauntlet, claiming free and open-source software violated 235 of its patents -- but refused (and continue to refuse) to get more specific. Today, thanks to a post by my ZDNet blogging colleague Jason Perlow, there's a new piece of patent info that should be of interest to those trying to keep score at home.

Just over a year ago, Microsoft officials threw down the patent gauntlet, claiming free and open-source software violated 235 of its patents -- but refused (and continue to refuse) to get more specific. Today, thanks to a post by my ZDNet blogging colleague Jason Perlow, there's a new piece of patent info that should be of interest to those trying to keep score at home.

Last year, Microsoft officials said Linux violated 42 Microsoft patents; Linux GUIs (graphical user interfaces) violated 65; Open Office violated 45; various free/open e-mail programs violated another 15; and assorted, sundry free/open-source software programs violated 68 Microsoft patents. That is as granular as the Redmondians were willing to get.

Today, thanks to a very in-depth analysis by Tom Kemp, CEO of Linux/Unix independent software vendor Centrify, there's a bit more detail on what Microsoft has patented in the Windows space. Using patent information Microsoft was required to make public by the antitrust watchers with the European Commission, Kemp counted how many Windows Server patents Microsoft has applied for and been awarded.

Among Kemp's findings:

  • "Of the 125 protocols posted on MSDN (Microsoft Developer Network) for Windows Server, 99 of the 125 protocols have no US patents associated with them, meaning 80% of the Windows server protocols do not have US patents associated with them." (My note: In other words, 20% are patented.)
  • "Factoring in protocols that also don't have any US patent applications, 76 of the 125 protocols don't have any US patents or US patent applications associated with them (60%), meaning 49 of the 125 (40%) do have US patents or US patent applications."
  • This is just a subset of what's patented in Windows. "The protocols posted for Windows Server apply to file and print, user and group administration and networking transport features only, not Windows Server features such as IIS. The WSPP (Workgroup Server Protocol Program) protocols also have approximately 25 European Union patents and patent applications."
  • There are another 50 unique U.S. patents, "in my estimation as of 4/18/2008 the Microsoft Windows OS from a client perspective (all features)."

Remember: In spite of all the "we want to be open and interoperable" rhetoric, Microsoft is making its patented protocols available for licensing, not for free. So this is just a taste of what software vendors would need to pay to license if they want to incorporate any Microsoft patented protocols in their commercial wares.

I wonder how many of the patents that Kemp documented are ones that Microsoft believes Linux and open-source to violate. That would be an interesting map....

Topics: Software, Hardware, Legal, Microsoft, Operating Systems, Servers, Windows

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

34 comments
Log in or register to join the discussion
  • I fail to see your point?

    Is it that MS is doing like IBM and Sun (open source "supporters") has done for years?
    No_Ax_to_Grind
    • I fail to see YOUR point

      I was unaware that it required a ruling, with attendant fines from the European Commission to get IBM and Sun to release patent information.

      Oh..That's because it didn't.
      carlino
      • How many has IBM

        sued over patents? LOTS, how many has MS sued? NONE.
        No_Ax_to_Grind
      • By the way, you are wrong

        IBM did in fact reveal pretty much everything to do with the original PC to appease the US DOJ in their monopoly settlement.
        No_Ax_to_Grind
    • No...

      [i]Is it that MS is doing like IBM and Sun (open source "supporters") has done for years?[/i]

      It's because Microsoft is evil, and Bill Gates is actually the Antichrist.

      Global Warming? Bill Gates' fault.

      Cancer? Bill Gates' fault.

      The Franco Prussion war? Bill Gates' fault.

      The extinction of the dinosaurs? Possibly Microsoft's fault.
      Hallowed are the Ori
      • Well, if Mary Jo

        was writing about it your right, everything is Microsoft's fault.
        No_Ax_to_Grind
      • ...

        Well if the guidance system that was running Microsoft Windows .000000000001BBG hadn't blue screened... the asteroid would have missed earth! ]:)
        Linux User 147560
        • LOL. (nt)

          nt
          Hallowed are the Ori
      • Are you having a mental breakdown John?

        I do worry ;-)
        fr0thy2
    • IT IS ILLEGAL TO USE NON-MS SOFTWARE

      Get real. Die Microsoft. Die. And soon.
      fr0thy2
      • Frothing at the mouth again...

        Well, if you're gonna wait for MS to die, then I suggest you don't hold your breath. It won't happen probably for another 10 years or more.
        transposeIT
  • How Many Are good?

    I wonder how many of these patents would stand up to a concerted effort to challenge them?
    As long as the U.S. patent system is broken we'll never know which patents are good valid patents and which are wishful thinking on Microsoft's part, filed to do damage to competitors, rather than to protect "new and useful inventions."
    carlino
    • Simply not true.

      Microosft has NEVER sued anyone over a patent violation. Sun and IBM who are supposedly big open source supporters do it all the time. Hmmm....
      No_Ax_to_Grind
      • So instead of suing..

        they "claim" that OSS is using their patents. How is this any different than actually suing someone? Here we have a case of threats, and that's about it, yet no evidence to the contrary. If one of these companies was smart they'd tell MS to put up or shut up, because it does have the potential to hurt their business. Fortunately for MS, these smaller companies don't have the finances of MS and can't fight the apparent BS coming from Balmers mouth. As it stands they are simply claims and nothing more as no proof has ever been given.

        If you feel the need to make a fool of yourself, at the very least, get the right group this time. I look forward to you being wrong yet again btw, I know you simply can't resist.
        Monkey_MCSE
        • No need, FSF did it for them.

          Opps, the head lawyer for the FSF. There, does that make you feel better?
          No_Ax_to_Grind
          • Lost count

            How many time are you going to repeat this lie ? You've been corrected every time and yet you still feel compelled to tell it again and again.
            Hemlock Stones
          • Re: Lost count

            [i]How many time are you going to repeat this lie ?[/i]

            How ever many times it takes. The guy's a liar.






            :)
            none none
          • Dan Rachiver != Eben Moglen, Period. (NT)

            NT
            odubtaig
          • Still living the delusion

            i see that you still haven't comprehended exactly what the FSF said.

            never mind, we all know you are a self-confessed troll.
            deaf_e_kate
        • Re: So instead of suing..

          [i]How is this any different than actually suing someone?[/i]

          It's much more effective than suing someone. You keep everybody guessing, especially skittish investors, and you don't run the risk of having your patent portfolio decimated by a court ruling.



          :)
          none none