Originally posted by jacob
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
The FSF Wants Microsoft To Do More To Help Fight Software Patents
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by kpedersen View PostExactly, and we don't congratulate IBM, Google et al for doing so do we? So why should we for Microsoft?
But you know Microsoft and Nvidia have special spot on this forum for conspiracies.
Comment
-
Basically, Microsoft needs to answers questions like :
- is it now safe to write opensource code that implements any of the FAT/exFAT filesystem tech that Microsoft olds patents on ? (like LFN or the whole of exFAT), in otherword, will upstream Linux kernel 5.xx be able to safely contain an exfat.ko without risk of attract the wrath of patent lawyers ?
- is it now safe to write opensource codec for H.264 and H.265, at least for the parts on which Microsoft hold patents ? (Remember: there are multiple patent pools for H.265 - Microsoft might not have the capabilities to grand access to all patents regarding H.265) In other word can Firefox finally support MPEG4 AVC videos with its own opensource code ? (same for VLC, FFMPEG, XINE, etc.) Not that it will matter much on Internet in the future (AV-1 is on track on achieving the same dominance that OPUS has), but it's still relevant in TV media world.
etc.
- Likes 2
Comment
-
So Microsoft given intention to do a good thing, but nothing has been done you.
I'll believe microsoft when the already written Linux exFAT kernel driver is merged into the mainline kernel with Microsoft's blessing.
I'll believe them when they announce they drop their patent trolling against android.
- Likes 1
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by kpedersen View Post
Exactly, and we don't congratulate IBM, Google et al for doing so do we? So why should we for Microsoft?
When Sun released Solaris and Java as open source (even though it was deliberately anti-GPL) we did congratulate them.
Every time Google or Facebook release something as open source it's appreciated and we congratulate them.
So I say welcome to the bright side, Microsoft, now be good and play by the rules.
Otherwise Microsoft and others will say that the FOSS community is just a bunch of whining activist children, and they will be right.
Comment
-
Originally posted by DrYak View PostBasically, Microsoft needs to answers questions like :
- is it now safe to write opensource code that implements any of the FAT/exFAT filesystem tech that Microsoft olds patents on ? (like LFN or the whole of exFAT), in otherword, will upstream Linux kernel 5.xx be able to safely contain an exfat.ko without risk of attract the wrath of patent lawyers ?
- is it now safe to write opensource codec for H.264 and H.265, at least for the parts on which Microsoft hold patents ? (Remember: there are multiple patent pools for H.265 - Microsoft might not have the capabilities to grand access to all patents regarding H.265) In other word can Firefox finally support MPEG4 AVC videos with its own opensource code ? (same for VLC, FFMPEG, XINE, etc.) Not that it will matter much on Internet in the future (AV-1 is on track on achieving the same dominance that OPUS has), but it's still relevant in TV media world.
etc.
As for ExFAT, that's a good question, really. A clear statement from MS would be great. Of course if they really want to show that times have changed, they could themselves develop and contribute an official driver for it đ
Comment
-
This patent agreement is in the same vein as the one they did with Novell. Now, it has a broader scope, the one of the OIN. It covers upstream code of the packages in this list: https://www.openinventionnetwork.com...=14&type=table
under the following conditions: https://www.openinventionnetwork.com.../linux-system/
So please, don't think this movement is the *right* thing. There's lot of software excluded from this patent license agreement. And organisations.
They should upstream code under the GPLv3 and stop doing "special" agreements which only work under the USA laws. The GPLv3 includes explicit agreement for not patent trolling and world wide non-exclusive licenses.
This agreement only works for OIN members. You, the little guy, are left out in the cold.
OIN facilitates the sharing of patent rights between thousands of OIN community members, and the coverage for sharing is called OINâs âLinux Systemâ. The definition of the Linux System relevant to the OIN license agreement is described on this page and associated tables.
Instead, they only cover glibc, Linux, systems using codecs in this table (https://www.openinventionnetwork.com...d=2&type=table) and snort. For example, merging code from snort into Suricata or Bro won't grant you anything, even though these two IDS have snort compatibility.
So please, don't say this is a good thing. This is only good for the current monopolies living in the OIN and using Linux as a software platform for DRMed devices like Android phones. It's not something which removes the danger from the general community.
Comment
-
Originally posted by jacob View PostMaybe you have a short memory. When IBM embraced Linux big time in the early 2000's everyone DID congratulate them.
When Sun released Solaris and Java as open source (even though it was deliberately anti-GPL) we did congratulate them.
Every time Google or Facebook release something as open source it's appreciated and we congratulate them.
So I say welcome to the bright side, Microsoft, now be good and play by the rules.
Otherwise Microsoft and others will say that the FOSS community is just a bunch of whining activist children, and they will be right.
I think MS has changed under Nadella, and they will still try to protect their market share, but it will be a fair fight now. Software patents are bad, and all of these actions are basically proving so.Last edited by audir8; 13 October 2018, 04:58 AM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by jacob View Post
Of course MS makes a good move for themselves. And that's how it should be. All the other companies that are usually considered good participants in the FOSS community - RedHat, Canonical, IBM, Google etc. (which, by the way, never meant that they should do ONLY FOSS software) are doing it for themselves. They are not charities. The FOSS community is based on an idea of what makes for ethical software development and distribution, and it's open to anyone who thinks it's worth engaging in. This move seems to indicate that MS has finally decided to bury the hatchet, become part of the FOSS community and be better of for it, rather than trying to destroy our community. The naysayers should be clear about what they want: do they expect Microsoft to do something that would be clearly NOT in their interest? Why would MS do that? Why would we want that for? Or would they perhaps prefer MS to stick to their old ways and proceed with an updated Halloween strategy?
Comment
Comment