 |
|
 |
| |
Welcome to virtuallinux.org. You are currently reading the article "Microsoft answers IP questions posed in LXer open letter". All articles on virtuallinux.org pertain to the ongoing assult on the worlds greatest Operating system. Continue on reading about "Microsoft answers IP questions posed in LXer open letter"
Microsoft answers IP questions posed in LXer open letter
Posted on Monday, December 11 2006 @ 09:20:07 EST by linuxwiz |
|
 |
|
 |
| |
Mid November, Steve Ballmer said "Linux"uses our [Microsoft Corp.]
intellectual property" and "Microsoft Corp. wanted to "get the
appropriate economic return for our shareholders from our innovation."
Many people didn't understand what he really meant, among them the LXer
editors. Therefore, LXer sent an Open Letter to the Waggener Edstrom
Rapid Response team, and two weeks later, the answers are in (no pun
intended). Check the full story for the answers a Microsoft
Spokesperson gave us, which hopefully can answer some of our questions.
LXer: When speaking about intellectual property, what is meant? It can't be copyright,
since almost all Microsoft Corp. software is closed source, which means people
who haven't got access to the code can't have infringed the copyright. Moreover,
copyright infringement would be easy to prove, since most of what Steve Ballmer
calls "Linux" is open source. Therefore, can 'intellectual property' be put on
par with 'software patents'?
MS: Intellectual property generally refers to the four
different ways that intangible assets can be protected. It does include
copyrights, which are an important way that Microsoft protects its
technology that is not simply limited to literal, executable code but
also includes other copyrightable ‘expression’ in software, such as
underlying design materials. Trademarks, trade secrets, and patents are
other important types of intellectual property. Patents in the software
industry are like patents in many other industries – innovations can be
protected through patents that then provide a basis for licensing those
innovations to others. Microsoft’s extensive patent portfolio has
allowed for significant license agreements with other industry
innovators, including: Novell, Cisco Systems, HP, SGI, Xerox, SAP and
Siemens. These agreements permit the parties to cross-pollinate their
development efforts with each others’ patented innovations, which
results in making key innovations more broadly available across varying
technologies.
LXer: Since the general belief is software patents
aren't enforceable in (amongst others) Europe, does this mean Microsoft
doesn't have any Intellectual Property from a European perspective? For
the shareholders Steve Ballmer was talking about, this would be very
important information.
MS: While software ‘as such’ is not patentable in Europe,
innovations implemented in a computer can be patented. Put another way,
just because an invention is embodied in software or other IT
technology as opposed to a mechanical device or chemical process, does
not disqualify that invention from getting patent protection.
Microsoft, like many others, does have patents issued in Europe on such
innovations. Intellectual property is an essential element of modern
business development in Europe and elsewhere. Access to and exchange of
intellectual property is essential for economic growth and development.
Through access to and interaction with other companies’ technology and
IP, it is possible to expand existing innovation and deliver new
solutions for customers while retaining IP and encouraging future
investment.
LXer: Why does Microsoft Corp. never specify which
Intellectual Property Linux infringes on? Is this because Microsoft
Corp. doesn't know, is it because Microsoft Corp. is afraid its
Intellectual Property isn't enforceable, or is there any other good
reason for this? Why doesn't Microsoft Corp. tell to its shareholders
for which Intellectual Property Microsoft wanted to "get the
appropriate economic return"? This is important information for the
shareholders.
MS: Through our agreement with Novell, Microsoft is
providing access to thousands of patents. As is standard with most
companies in this and indeed other industries, we do not publicly list
the patents that are applicable to a product or by a component. One of
the benefits of patent agreements is that they allow freedom of action
now and in the future. Novell’s products and Microsoft’s products
change on a regular basis and conducting a complete patent analyses for
every version of every product is costly and complex. As we’ve stated,
we undertook an analysis of our patent portfolio and concluded that it
was necessary and important to create a patent covenant which Novell
and Microsoft agreed on for the benefit of our customers.
LXer: If Linux infringes on the Intellectual
Property, why hasn't Microsoft already tried to "get the appropriate
economic return for our shareholders from our innovation." earlier? The
shareholders could already have gotten the appropriate economic return
for their investments already if Microsoft Corp. would have taken
action, don't they?
MS: Our priority has been to license our technology widely.
It has taken us time to think through how to bridge two very different
software licensing models through technical and IP collaboration.
Microsoft has also had to evolve our thinking over time. From the
announcement of our “open to all interested parties” IP licensing
program in 2003 to increased collaboration with open source businesses
like JBOSS, SugarCRM, XenSource, MySQL and Zend, we’ve been focused on
meeting the needs of our customers and partners. Our agreement with
Novell is another example of that.
I'll leave the commenting up to you.
Source
|
|
 |
 |
 |
| |
|
 |
|
| |
Article Rating
Average Score: 0
Votes: 0
|
|
 |
 |
 |
|
Welcome Anonymous
Login:
Membership:
