Microsoft and SUSE extend Microsoft's controversial Novell Linux pact

By | July 25, 2011, 8:52am PDT

Summary: Microsoft and SUSE announced they are extending the 2006 Microsoft-Novell Linux patent-protection agreement, and that Microsoft is buying $100 million worth of SUSE Linux Enterprise certificates for its customers.

In November 2006, Microsoft inked its controversial cross-licensing pact with Novell. In exchange for Microsoft distributing to its customers certificates for Novell’s SUSE Linux, Novell paid Microsoft patent-licensing royalties for Linux.

The original pact was due to expire in 2012. On July 25, Microsoft and SUSE announced a year ahead of that expiration date that they’re extending their partnership.

Microsoft is buying $100 million in additional SUSE Linux Enterprise certificates and the pair are going to continue to collaborate on interopability solutions through January 1, 2016. The SUSE certificates are designed to insure Microsoft customers who are implementing Linux that they won’t be caught in any Microsoft-Linux patent crossfire.

In the years following the original Microsoft-Novell agreement, a lot happened. In February 2007, Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer stated the deal between Microsoft and Novell was proof that open-source vendors need to respect Microsoft’s intellectual property. One month later,Microsoft licensing officials claimed publicly that Linux and other free software violated 235 Microsoft patents. Microsoft convinced a few smaller Linux vendors to sign patent-licensing deals with the company.

In 2010, Attachmate ended up purchasing Novell for $2.2 billion, and Microsoft and a handful of other tech companies bought 800 or so Novell patents as part of the arrangement.

In more recent months, Microsoft has increased its IP licensing pressures on Linux and Android vendors and has convinced quite a few, including Amazon, General Dynamics, Onkyo and Velocity Micro, to sign patent-licensing agreements. Barnes & Noble, maker of the Linux-based Nook, is fighting Microsoft over its attempt to exert its IP claims.

Microsoft and SUSE said that the agreement is benefiting customers and partners who need interop guarantees to do things like run SUSE guests on Microsoft’s Hyper-V hypervisor.

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

Topics

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).

Disclosure

Mary-Jo Foley

Freelance journalist/blogger Mary Jo Foley has nothing to disclose. WYSIWYG (what you see is what you get). I do not own Microsoft stock or stock in any of its partners or competitors. I have no business ventures that are sponsored by/funded by Microsoft or any of its partners or competitors.

Biography

Mary-Jo Foley

Mary Jo Foley has covered the tech industry for 25 years for a variety of publications, including ZDNet, eWeek and Baseline. She has kept close tabs on Microsoft strategy, products and technologies for the past 10 years. In the late 1990s, she penned the award-winning "At The Evil Empire" column for ZDNet, and more recently the Microsoft Watch blog for Ziff Davis.

Got a tip? Send her an email with your rants, rumors, tips and tattles. Confidentiality guaranteed.

Related Discussions on TechRepublic

Did you know you can take part in these discussions with your ZDNet membership?
38
Comments

Join the conversation!

Just In

RE: Microsoft and SUSE extend Microsoft's controversial Novell Linux pact
dfwekrdfe56-24353621201615702709665493157816 Updated - 10th Nov
Really should have refused very likely in a nut-shell choose to express, the individual plucked r essential pittsburgh steelers jerseys accurately. Information steelers jerseys your presented steeler jerseys are adeptly located.
yup we get it... linux is good and microsoft is bad!
0 Votes
+ -
More like bad to the bone
Mr. Dee 25th Jul
@taabello@... ...baby!
0 Votes
+ -
the community has denounced this evil pact and are calling on people to rise against M$ and its lap dog Novell:
http://techrights.org/2011/02/24/novell-reduces-freedom/
@Linux Geek

Your statement kind of reminds me of the old "dictatorship of the proletariat" sloganeering that the Bolsheviks were so fond of. Are all teatards Communists, or just you?
0 Votes
+ -
are you blind?
Linux Geek Updated - 25th Jul
@Sir Name
the people are outraged about this FUD and the link I posted you is a living proof the coming from experts.
@French fisherman

Whatever you say, comrade.
@Sir Name
you are very confused so here is a hint for this picture: http://www.teapartysoldier.com/
We are coming to cleanse Washington and fight the axis of evil software.
  • Flagged
It's easy to criticize Novell/Attachmate in this issue, but the underlying issue is as old as the hills. It is a form of the protection racket. It is easy to say businesses need to stand up to the bully on the block, unless you're one of them. A lot of smaller businesses figure it's easier to pay the bully rather than risk damage to their business. Only law enforcement can have much effect, but often they are implicitly part of the scheme, such as here in the U.S. Law-makers have very little motive to do anything about these rackets. It wouldn't help their pocket book any!
@fretinator@...
+1
NPR did a story about that. "You have such a nice shop, it would be a shame if someone was to sue you..."
MS=biggest patent troll in the room
@kirovs@... A patent troll generally refers to non-practicing entities. I think it a difficult argument to make that Microsoft qualifies.
@rbethell@...
Not really. Not when fees from abuse of patents are bigger than the income from your own product....
@kirovs@...

lol i am pretty sure Windows and Windows server has made more money then Suse linux happy
@Knix96@...
Windows phone buddy?
@fretinator.

I disagree with the application of Patents to software. It is, however, the law of the land at the moment.

if your proposition is that any organization that enforces it's property rights when perceiving trespass against those rights is involved in the equivalent of criminal extortion, then you have just slurred just about every business that has ever existed.

Let us not forget that regulatory enforcement actions, like the anti-trust lawsuit against MS in the 90s and the FTC action against Google now, never happen in a vacuum and only occur with substantial "pushing" from other commercial competitors who have a lot to gain from the primary commercial vendor being targeted for enforcement.

If you are advocating a libertarian position whereby we dramatically cut government intervention in the market place to reduce the amount of leverage the big guys have from influence in all aspects of "the law" as repeat players, then I can see logical advocacy in your post.
0 Votes
+ -
You can disagree with a law
Richard Flude 25th Jul
MS patents, some of them broad and largely indefensible, is the primary anticompetitive weapon used by the company today. Unlike their past behavior they're now within the law. But let's not defend the law that allows this to happen!

They aren't the only company doing it, all the large players set out to develop large patent portfolios. Conveniently they then cross licensed each other. Few have gone as far a MS paying competitors to intimidate other competitors as with this Novell deal.
0 Votes
+ -
That's far from true, Richard Flude
William Pharaoh 25th Jul
@Richard Flude
MS patents, some of them broad and largely indefensible, is the primary anticompetitive weapon used by the company today

That's about the 100th time you said it, and no matter how many times you've been proven wrong, you still repeate it like it will come true or something.

Just pointing that out.
0 Votes
+ -
Proving something wrong requires proof
Richard Flude Updated - 25th Jul
Saying something doesn't "prove" anything wrong.

Why is it not an anticompetitive weapon (when by their nature patents restrict competition)?

Are you claiming the large companies don't have cross licensing deals?

Why did MS (under Gates) start deluging the United States Patent and Trademark Office from 2005 with a target of 3000 patents a year? Many unlikely to survive a appeal on nonobvious idea grounds (yet expensive to fight or defend for SMEs).

Gates himself said in 1991 (in response to Apple action for lifting their ideas) "If people had understood how patents would be granted when most of today's ideas were invented, and had taken out patents, the industry would be at a complete standstill today. The solution to this is patent exchanges with large companies and patenting as much as we can." Fine for him with MS's resources.

There's plenty more, now your turn;-)
That's about the 100th time you said it, and no matter how many times you've been proven wrong, you still repeate it like it will come true or something.

Yes and for the 100th time you'll come up with some lame response without actually refuting anything that's been said.

The sign of a well-indoctrinated parrot.
0 Votes
+ -
Richard has it right, William
benched42 26th Jul
@William Pharaoh,

"MS patents, some of them broad and largely indefensible, is the primary anticompetitive weapon used by the company today." Well, here are a few:

1. Patent 6,594,674 - System and method for creating multiple files from a single source file. This patent covers packing a couple of files together into one package, from which you can extract individual files. This patent has been awarded July 15, 2003. ZIP file technology has been around well before 2003 and violates this patent. Hmmmm.

2. Patent 6,604,008 - Scoring based upon goals achieved and subjective elements. This patent covers scoring in computer games that does not only award points for achieving goals but also for performing feats. The patent has been granted August 5, 2003. Really? Moving on to the next level without a minimum score? Again, in 2003?

3. Patent 6,606,618 - Method for optimizing the performance of a database. This patent covers using (automated) numerical key-files for database systems that contain text or objects. The patent has been granted August 12, 2003. Everyone who has worked with databases knows using numerical key files is a must if you want to efficiently access data. Everyone generates numerical key files if the data does not contain natural numerical keys. This is basic computer science that has been taught in the earliest courses on datastructures.

4. Patent 6,606,101 - Information pointers. This patent covers the use of "popup notes" when you move your mouse pointer over an object on the screen. It has been granted August 12, 2003.

5. Patent 6,618,857 - Method and system for installing software on a computer system. This patent covers installing software on a computer system whereby more than one file is copied to the system and files that already exist are only overwritten in special circumstances. The patent has been granted September 9, 2003. Virtually all programs nowadays are installed in this manner.

Need I go on? There are so many inane patents that Microsoft owns (that they did NOT invent the processes for) that even The Onion got into the act: http://www.theonion.com/articles/microsoft-patents-ones-zeroes,599/
@fhsheridan The key is, they don't actually use the law to do it - it is just the threat of possible future litigation that they are using as a weapon. Companies with deep pockets and large war chests of vague software patents use the fact that they can "litigate" smaller companies to death as a potent weapon to exact protection money (IP cross-licensing fees). It not really about defending IP, it's about defending turf. As Vonage found out, you pay a high price to roll with the big boys.
@fretinator@...

Chief .. litigation is the application of the law. It's through litigation, our dispute resolution process, that "case law" is made. Wow. Obviously people are right about the state of public education. Terrible.
@fhsheridan@...
fretinator is absolutely correct. Because in US the loosing side does not need to pay the other side's expenses a deep pocket entity can sue any small fish into oblivion. Therefore the application of the law is no longer simply a resolution process. Perhaps an unintended consequence?
@fhsheridan
You're missing the point. It doesn't matter if the smaller company is right if it can't afford to defend itself against the larger company. Even if they can afford to defend themselves, the larger company can make a licensing deal cheaper than winning the legal case (which involves at least some risk because even if you are right you can still lose). This makes the patent licenses just like a protection racket.
The U.S. justice department needs to investigate why it allowed Microsoft to own a competing operating system so different from their own.
This is a worse offense in my view than MS offering only their search engine in their OS or only offering their own video viewer.
What it has cause is Microsoft to control and monopolize the operating systems available in favor of their own product thus reducing consumer choices.
The problem with the Barnes & Nobel lawsuit by Microsoft is it has absolutely nothing to do with Linux. It is about the interface and web browsing. Look at the particulars of the case yourself. Why people keep pointing to that as a Linux/Android issue I will never know. B&N did their own interface for Android on their ebook reader. So this lawsuit has absolutely no effect at all on Android or Linux. Once again Microsoft is making claims against Android and Linux and publicly offers nothing to support their position. This leads me to believe that Microsoft knows that they don't have crap and/or their patents will be invalidated and they don't want the public looking at their patents to break them. I would bet the patents are overly broad and there is prior art out there and that is exactly what Microsoft is afraid of and doesn't want anyone to know. If they were so sure of themselves they wouldn't make anyone sign an NDA just to see what the patents are that are claimed to be violated. If Microsoft was sure of their position they would publicly announce the patents because they would be sure they hold up, but that is not the case at all. Microsoft is hiding behind NDA's hoping they can keep their protection racket going.
@tim.w.jung@...
What an idiot. No one pays unless they know they are going to lose. Keep preaching your FUD. Are you Linux Geek in a pseudonym?
@hopp64
I think the idiot is you. If you know that you are gonna pay less than going to court and winning (yes that is what happens), you are still going to settle.
@hopp64
"No one pays unless they know they are going to lose."

Nothing could be further from the truth. A lot of patent deals are purposely offered at a price that makes taking the deal cheaper than winning the lawsuit. Add to that the risk that you can lose the suit even when you are right and it's easy for companies to justify taking the deal instead of going to court just for the principle of the thing (corporations' only principles tend to be dollar signs anyway).
@hopp64
Way to resort to name calling. In reality, MS has the funds to sue smaller companies out of existence - even if the smaller is legally right. It is this threat that they use (not always, but often) to coerce smaller companies into settling. That's why (some) people call it "extortion" although "coercion" is a much more accurate term.
Microsoft has been talking up this FUD for years and has yet to put its money where its mouth is. Let's just say I'll believe them when my poo turns purple and smells like rainbow sorbet.
@snoop0x7b

blah blah blah same posts never any proof.
0 Votes
+ -
Microsoft Needs Friends
tomogden 26th Jul
For a company that stagnated 11 years ago, you would think they would be more concerned with public image and branding. Just as over-indulging Mr. Potter was doomed to die of a heart attack, MS is doomed to choke on their own arrogance.
0 Votes
+ -
Ah, I understand...
bandersnatch42vt 26th Jul
...extortion, gangland style.
Just in case it somehow becomes smart business to own one. You know, they've seen Larry do it even before the whole Sun takeover and it seems like every big shop is arming themselves with Linuxness so they just keep their options open whilst simultaneously doing as much damage to the whole thing (which is still a fly in thier soup) as they can.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Microsoft and SUSE extend Microsoft's controversial Novell Linux pact
jackson1984-24316069205748857739440257893812 9th Oct
It is absolutely notably stimulating conduct you could possibly have composed for us. Some individuals will need to are aware that these necessary details football jerseys can take place to everyone. You have unveiled to me a larger outlook now.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Microsoft and SUSE extend Microsoft's controversial Novell Linux pact
tomlin21-24319035676893835085146735905770 11th Oct
This web-site could be incredibly good! How can I create a individual equivalent nfl jerseys usa to this?
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Microsoft and SUSE extend Microsoft's controversial Novell Linux pact
dfwekrdfe56-24353621201615702709665493157816 Updated - 10th Nov
Really should have refused very likely in a nut-shell choose to express, the individual plucked r essential pittsburgh steelers jerseys accurately. Information steelers jerseys your presented steeler jerseys are adeptly located.

Join the conversation!

Formatting +
BB Codes - Note: HTML is not supported in forums
  • [b] Bold [/b]
  • [i] Italic [/i]
  • [u] Underline [/u]
  • [s] Strikethrough [/s]
  • [q] "Quote" [/q]
  • [ol][*] 1. Ordered List [/ol]
  • [ul][*] · Unordered List [/ul]
  • [pre] Preformat [/pre]
  • [quote] "Blockquote" [/quote]
ie8 fix

The best of ZDNet, delivered

ZDNet Newsletters

Get the best of ZDNet delivered straight to your inbox

Facebook Activity

White Papers, Webcasts, & Resources
ie8 fix