All About Microsoft

Mary-Jo Foley
Home / News & Blogs / All About Microsoft

Novell publishes details on its Microsoft patent deal

By | May 26, 2007, 8:43am PDT

Novell has posted to the Securites and Exchange Commission (SEC) Web site redacted versions of the company’s patent, business and technology agreements with Microsoft, which it signed in November 2006.

Novell officials said earlier this week they would post these documents before the end of May. The company released the filings late on May 25, the start of a three-day holiday weekend in the U.S.

Did anything juicy make it past the “marked as confidential” cuts? Groklaw has highlightsof some of the documentation specific to the Microsoft-Novell patent arrangements:

“If the final version of GPLv3 contains terms or conditions that interfere with our agreement with Microsoft or our ability to distribute GPLv3 code, Microsoft may cease to distribute SUSE Linux coupons in order to avoid the extension of its patent covenants to a broader range of GPLv3 software recipients, we may need to modify our relationship with Microsoft under less advantageous terms than our current agreement, or we may be restricted in our ability to include GPLv3 code in our products, any of which could adversely affect our business and our operating results. In such a case, we would likely explore alternatives to remedy the conflict, but there is no assurance that we would be successful in these efforts.”

So now it’s even more obvious why Microsoft has been throwing around the “235 patents infringed by open source” claim. Novell is confirming that Microsoft may have to stop distributing SuSE Linux coupons if the Free Software Foundation’s General Public License (GPL) version 3 goes through with the current patent language in place.

Having to eliminate the SuSE distribution part of its Novell agreement would hurt Microsoft’s campaign to convince other open-source vendors to sign similar deals. It also wouldn’t make Microsoft look too good to the handful of large corporate customers (that Microsoft touts every chance it gets) who Microsoft has convinced to go with SuSE Linux.

There is a lot more legal mumbo-jumbo on the SEC site regarding the Microsoft-Novell deal. Anyone see any other interesting nonredacted info?

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

More from “All About Microsoft”

Topics

Novell Inc., Patent, Agreement, Microsoft Corp., GPLv3, SuSE, Mary Jo Foley

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?
Ask a Question Start a Discussion
34
Comments
Add Your Opinion

Join the conversation!

Just In

RE: Novell publishes details on its Microsoft patent deal
makrejktt62-24353626312913337629402893125563 Updated - 12th Nov
Foremost I really don't article referring to packers jersey niche sites, on the contrary buy jerseys I'd personally would like to state that such 49ers jerseys a short article ultimately required me when i say to execute therefore ,. Accurately terrific fill out!
View in thread
0 Votes
+ -
Too Late
Yagotta B. Kidding 26th May 2007
Since the coupons don't have any expiration date, it won't matter if Microsoft stops distributing them.

The only way out for MS at this point is to make sure that Novell never distributes GPLv3 software that they claim to be covered by their patents. Since Samba is the biggie there, that's going to put Novell in a serious bind.
0 Votes
+ -
It seems like FSF is the spoil sport
zzz1234567890 26th May 2007
FSF have the GPL licence which they want everyone to follow. However FSF does not comply with others IP. To the FSF its their way or the highway.

The FSF and other OSS, not respecting IP that belongs to others and to use politics in their justification of IP violation defense, just shows how ___,____,____ these guys are.
0 Votes
+ -
Oh really?
odubtaig 27th May 2007
I'm sure you have, like, a jillion examples to prove this claim. I mean, the FSF would love to respect these claimed 235 patents if they knew what the hell they were.
0 Votes
+ -
why dont you go ask Stallman
zzz1234567890 27th May 2007
why dont you go ask Stallman and and see if he denies.
Now if you are not upto date with whats going on, it doesnt make sense for me to waste my time getting you up to date.
0 Votes
+ -
Again with the Stallman.
odubtaig 27th May 2007
If you can't be bothered to correlate the actual facts (instead of, apparently, taking no_ax at face value, assuming that's not you) it's not my job to tell you to shove it, that's just something I want to do.

Stallman has nothing. OK, he has a mad beard, a weight problem and a vague idea from someone else's biased research that Linux might have violated 283 patents (of which 27 belonged to Microsoft). Seeing, however, as a) the Linux kernel was considered not to have even the remotest possibility of violating any patents at that time and b) the number was not 235 could you please not post if you're not going to engage your brain.

This link http://news.zdnet.com/2100-3513_22-5291403.html is what Stallman had in 2004. Let's see, uhhh, 235 minus 27 equals a difference 208 between the report Stallman referred to and what Microsoft are claiming. It's fairly basic subtraction, the kind a five year old could manage but that seems somehow beyond your capabilities. Or maybe you're just too lazy to bother. Either way, you need to stop depriving those with more grey matter than white of their fair share of oxygen.
0 Votes
+ -
and if cant comprehend, you should stop barking like a mad dog for nothing
zzz1234567890 28th May 2007
"Stallman has nothing"

Who the hell are you, a nobody. If you cant talk anything relevant maybe you should shut your mouth.



"Let's see, uhhh, 235 minus 27 equals a difference 208 between the report Stallman referred to and what Microsoft are claiming"

Why dont you ask Stallman.
It could be that Microsoft decided to be more conservative.
And you entire theory is based on the difference, 235 and 208. No wonder you bark like a dog for nothing, absolutely no substance to anything you say.
0 Votes
+ -
And you are, what, Mr Big?
odubtaig 28th May 2007
Seriously, who the **** are you? You too important to actually provide evidence to back up your claims? Insults and screeching may have worked in the playground but you're in the real world now, time to grow up.
0 Votes
+ -
PS
odubtaig 28th May 2007
Apologies for ****ing on your bonfire merely by having actual evidence to back up my claims and showing you up to be the fraud you are.

Really.

Sincerely, Nobody.
0 Votes
+ -
Doesn't matter
TripleII-21189418044173169409978279405827 28th May 2007
defconvegas posts the same sad ole story everywhere he can. Facts don't mean anything, pushing that Open Source is vile, steals IP, etc is the only goal.

TripleII
0 Votes
+ -
Oh, I figured that,
odubtaig 28th May 2007
but it's the same with Republicans isn't it? They only gained so much power because their views remained unopposed and so people believed them.
0 Votes
+ -
Oh wait, my bad. That was in the kernel, not asides from it.
odubtaig 27th May 2007
So, the real disparity is OSRM's claim of 27 patents in the kernel against Microsoft's claim of 42 in the kernel.

Secondly, as the transcript at http://fsfeurope.org/projects/gplv3/barcelona-rms-transcript.en.html shows, all Stallman knows is:

"One large program has been carefully studied by a lawyer in the US, who looked for all the software patents that might prohibit some part of it. That program is Linux, the kernel of the GNU+Linux operating system. He found 283 different patents applying to various techniques and features implemented somewhere in Linux."

What's he referring to again? Oh yeah, http://news.zdnet.com/2100-3513_22-5291403.html

Potential infringement. Potential. "Because of the effect that knowledge of potential infringement has, OSRM isn't releasing its list of patents." What does that mean? Stallman has a number. not a patent number, just a three digit one of "potential infringements".

PS Stallman does not control the Linux Kernel, OpenOffice.org, Xorg or any e-mail programs. They are all other people's projects so it's also moronic to assume he knows anything about their code seeing as he may never have even glanced at it. The mysterious 'others' category will have to be left to everyone's imaginations, much like the nature of the claimed patents.
0 Votes
+ -
everybody obeys the law
zzz1234567890 28th May 2007
"Stallman does not control the Linux Kernel, OpenOffice.org, Xorg or any e-mail programs. They are all other people's projects "

Including the people in the so called peoples project.
Secondly whoever said they are the peoples project, they definitly dint ask the people, just do something and say it the peoples project and so we get a free pass to everything and we are above the law. Maybe the fooled you, not the majority of the people.
0 Votes
+ -
In English please. NT
odubtaig 28th May 2007
NT
0 Votes
+ -
Blowfish & Fugu guts
MoralOrder 30th May 2007
Reading such articles conjures up some thoughts when DOS and Windows got started. There were two windows systems competing, Microsoft and DeskView (if I can recall correctly). In the 80's most software was copy protected, and the biggest hobby for many was to crack the copy protection. Then Microsoft brought out it's software without copy protection, and a licence. It was quickly copied and most had a private copy. Companies bought the software, and the employees had pirate copies at home. Some believe that this was intended by MS, or maybe MS realised later that the lock-in mechanism may be the best marketing ploy to help all users to get to know how to work with Windows _only_. Soon all other systems disappeared; like DeskView. Presently, schools and learning institutions get the software donated to prepare the future users and decision makers for using MS; company decision makers buy what they know and what most people can use, saving on costly training the users do at home in their own time.

Just having a possible "IP patent infringement" stick with which MS threaten to litigate is large enough for many; but many keep pirating. Companies with any sense will not risk pirating in their offices, they buy MS products and write it off as expenses. Most private individuals can't/won't write it off every 2-3 years.

On the one hand MS threats, on the other it does not do enough to stop piracy, intentionally keeping users locked into its products. Giving MS the benefit of the doubt, they could do it but don't; for the money they spend on R&D, they must have enough expertise to write code to prevent piracy. This has been the most successful subliminal marketing ever (besides only being able to buy hardware with MS pre-installed). In this way it will not scare off enough people to go to OSS, keeping them hooked to buying and using only what they already know.

The threat may be real or not, but once MS comes out with what the so-called IP patients theft entails, it will get into a quagmire. Keeping it under cover and treating is like a blowfish (Tetraodontidae), fooling the adversary of it's 'size/power'. Most adversaries evade a conflict it cannot estimate the cost of. A legal process may overstretch most companies' financial resources - then they rather licence (or do the MicroVELL/NOsoft trick). Who is going to call the bluff on this probable patents FUD with some Fugu? IBM? HP? Guess MS will not take them on, their pockets are just as deep. They may force MS to eat blowfish guts.
0 Votes
+ -
Hot air
Ole Man 27th May 2007
And stinky hot air to boot.

Your statements only prove one of three
things, if not three of three things.

1. You have never read the GPL license
and don't know anything about.

2. You have read the GPL license but you
still don't know anything about it.

3. Makes no difference if you have or
have not read the GPL license, you don't
care what it says and you're really only
blowing hot air.

If you're not blowing hot air, please
list the IP that "The FSF and other OSS,
not respecting". We would like to see
the list, please. And exactly what
political philosophies the FSF and OSS
are using?

Thank you.
0 Votes
+ -
FSF and another organisation have gone over this
zzz1234567890 27th May 2007
Even Stallman has admitted to the IP violations.
Even Schwartz from Sun has claimed OSS violated its IP.

Its pretty evident that you dont want to face the truth/facts.
0 Votes
+ -
Keep pushing the FUD
TripleII-21189418044173169409978279405827 27th May 2007
There is no computer system anywhere, no OS, no program that does not infringe on someones (probably bogus) patent. Like I posted before, MS infringes on Sun, the OIN network, Novel patents, just like IBM on all, and Open Source on all, etc. The key here is, which patents are valid. MS is scared to disclose because don't want them invalidated. 235 untested bogus patents is worth more than 14 valid patents.

The FSF did an analysis and found that of the patents it found it thought it likely infringed on were all prior art, too vague or otherwise invalid and would not stand up to a challenge. The verdict, ignore it, it is a non issue.

One point you always keep ignoring as I throw it back into your "face", which company has been found guilty of infringing over and over and over again? Think there are no more infringements? What does that say about a companies' respect for the IP of others?

TripleII
0 Votes
+ -
First of all, before you can see the truth
Ole Man 29th May 2007
You must remove your head from whatever
dark hole you have it in and open your
eyes (well, maybe wipe the crud out of
your eyes before opening them).

Why do you keep making asinine
statements about the FSF license?
Why don't you read it and post the parts
that is violating anything of yours or
Microsoft's property?

How would you know what Stallman or
Schwartz has claimed? How would you know
what they are claiming now? Have you
consulted with them daily? Weekly?
Monthly? Anything you didn't hear from
them is heresay.
0 Votes
+ -
There are plenty of
Suicida| 28th May 2007
alternative licenses to use, the GPL has always been considered restrictive compared to the BSD license.

No one is forcing anyone to use the GPL unless you are building against a GPL licensed library for example, and even then existing ones are licensed via the GPLv2. So it would only affect newer releases.
0 Votes
+ -
Clarification from Novell
blowry@... 26th May 2007
Hi Mary Jo:

A quick point of clarification. The language you mentioned as having been picked up by Groklaw is not part of the agreements with Microsoft. It's language from our 10-K annual report document, which we also filed yesterday. It's in the section of the 10-K which addresses risk factors, and it's one of many factors listed (others include, for example, the risk that our shift to an indirect model might result in revenue fluctuation, slower that anticipated growth in our varopis businesses, and a negative outcome in the SCO case). This is a standard part of an annual report, designed to alert investors to any potential risks the company is aware of that could have an impact on the business.

I wanted to clarify this, since your post, and the Groklaw language, would mistakenly lead readers to think this language was somehow included in the agreemeents we struck with Microsoft.

Thanks.
0 Votes
+ -
Still, any way you slice it, you deal with Microsoft STINKS, and it has NOT
DonnieBoy 28th May 2007
helped you. And this lame post is not helping your position on little bit either.
0 Votes
+ -
"wanted to clarify this"
Ole Man 29th May 2007
You can't clarify muddy waters (with
probably lots of stinky stuff mixed in
too).

If you had a muddy water clarifier you
could patent it and sell them like
hotcakes. Too bad! You don't!
0 Votes
+ -
Wow, FSF sure know how to kill a good thing!
NonZealot 26th May 2007
we may need to modify our relationship with Microsoft under less advantageous terms than our current agreement, or we may be restricted in our ability to include GPLv3 code in our products, any of which could adversely affect our business and our operating results.

That's great, why don't we hurt the business model of one of the biggest suppliers of open source software. Way to convince other entrepreneurs that they should build a business around offering Linux and Linux services.

Way to cut off your nose to spite your face. I'm pissed about this, not because I hate Linux, but just the opposite, I really like Linux. Idiots like Stallman are doing everything they can to make sure that as few people as possible see the benefits I've been enjoying since first installing it. I hope he fails.
0 Votes
+ -
Hard cheese.
odubtaig 27th May 2007
All software released under the GPL belongs to the respective copyright holder or holders and it's their right to say how and when their IP can be distributed. Novell, not exactly being a newbie in the world of IP, understands that they are dealing with other people's IP and that what happens with this IP is not entirely under their control. Novell also knew the position of the FSF which owns all the IP rights to the GNU compilers and assorted other GNU code that glues SuSE Linux together.

Yet knowing all this, they still went ahead with this extremely ill advised deal.

If you're going to blame anyone, blame Novell for strangling the goose that lays the golden egg. At risk of overloading the forum with metaphors, you can't eat your cake and have it too and you can't base a business around one principle then do something that completely contradicts it and expect no fallout.

At this stage, SuSE can probably be thankful that the kernel probably won't be moved from GPLv2. Then they can either give up on the deal or work very hard at updating the last versions of all GNU software released under GPLv2 themselves without any help from the FSF.
0 Votes
+ -
This was MS's attempt to proprietorize Open Source
TripleII-21189418044173169409978279405827 27th May 2007
My new word for the day, proprietorize. They want and need to find a way to both make money off open source themselves and cause Open Source to no longer seem/actually be free (if the user so desires).

Whether the GPL V3 is a good or bad license, the industry will decide. The fact that MS is so opposed and working hard to get it's deals in before V3 is used tells me it can't be that far off the mark.

TripleII
0 Votes
+ -
"proprietorize"
Ole Man 29th May 2007
Great word. Thanks!

I'm going to proprietorize some of the
Fud being bandied about on the talkbacks
and start redacting it.

The GPL V3 is good. It stops crooks from
sneaking around the end zone and
stealing the code. That's what Microsoft
don't like. That's what
Microsoft/Novelle already did, and they
don't like the finger pointed at them.
Even they (Microsoft/Novelled) called
their "agreement/deal" twisted.

"Twisted"? Sounds crooked to me.
0 Votes
+ -
Yea, like Richard Stallman will be criying about ruining a deal that is
DonnieBoy 28th May 2007
good for MS and Novel!!!

The customers will keep on using Red Hat, Ubuntu, JBoss, MySQL, OpenOffice, . . . . . .

And fewer will be using Novel software, as they are becoming irrelevant, and signing deals that threaten customers.
0 Votes
+ -
Really mixed up
Ole Man 29th May 2007
You are really really really mixed up.
If you "really like Linux", go ahead and
use it, and if you really want to pay
Microsoft for it, go ahead and send them
your money. How is "Idiots like
Stallman" preventing you from "enjoying
the benefits"? They're not trying to
stop you from giving Microsoft your
money are they? You don't think
Microsoft wants anything else (besides
your money) do you? If you do, Stallman
aint the idiot here. Try looking in your
mirror. There's where the culprit is
lurking.
0 Votes
+ -
The details
D T Schmitz 28th May 2007
***************************************************
***************************************************
***************************************************
0 Votes
+ -
Great information! Thank You!
Ole Man 29th May 2007
Right up their with Microsoft/Novelle
press releases. And all properly
redacted, too. Does seem to be a little
more information than one can glean from
their uninformed redacted statements,
though.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Novell publishes details on its Microsoft patent deal
Jackie150 17th Sep 2009
This is a vague and pointless ad that ends with Bill Gates wriggling his derriere. sexy lingerieI for one don't want to think any further on the symbology of this ad, much less "deeper."
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Novell publishes details on its Microsoft patent deal
lingerie wholesale 13th Oct 2009
This is a vague and pointless ad that ends with Bill Gates wriggling his derriere. http://www.dear-lover.com for one don't want to think any further on the symbology of this ad, much less "deeper."...
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Novell publishes details on its Microsoft patent deal
jackson1984-24316069205748857739440257893812 10th Oct
Big give superb outcome! You really individual the expertise of resourceful producing. I individually lv ******** on sale cherished the summarization specially the exact movement of excellent ideas.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Novell publishes details on its Microsoft patent deal
makrejktt62-24353626312913337629402893125563 Updated - 12th Nov
Foremost I really don't article referring to packers jersey niche sites, on the contrary buy jerseys I'd personally would like to state that such 49ers jerseys a short article ultimately required me when i say to execute therefore ,. Accurately terrific fill out!

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

Blog Roll

Blog Archive

White Papers, Webcasts, & Resources
ie8 fix