Does Microsoft's settlement fever signal IP offensive?

TalkBack 31 of 33:

Next »

« Previous

• Thread View
• Flat View

A patent based "attack" can take many forms.

I think many are expecting an all out legal attack on Linux. There was a time I thought that might happen but upon a lot of reflection I don't believe that will happen. Or it will not happen in the manner most are thinking it will. Let me explain.

MS has used a tactic that has always worked for them in the past, embrace, extend, and extinguish. I see no reason to abandon this tried and true strategy and it will be the preferred method for "dealing with open source". So how could they do this you ask? Let's take a hypothetical and see where it leads us.

MS introduces lots of new (or re-worked) tech to the industry. They make it available via licensing at zero cost and grant a perpetual license at no cost. (see recent headlines) On the face of it this is accepted as a good thing because it allows interoperability with Microsoft products. Companies, both proprietary and pure open source, adopt these technologies and start delivering products that interoperate with MS products.

*That takes care of embrace.*

But there is a tiny caveat, Microsoft license agreements (EULA) must be included in such software. Not a big thing in and of itself, but it does start the process of delivering Microsoft products via the open source distro's. In other words, Microsoft's competition is now delivering their product for them.

*That takes care of extend.*

Ok, now lets fast forward a couple of years. The average open source box now has say a couple dozen components build on MS technology. (I don't know what they will all be but there will be something.) With the basic pieces in place MS then offers even more products/features/functions up the product stack that require not only the basics be in place, but also a "few" other pieces that are NOT available via the Linux distros. Of course MS will sell you the application/feature/function by that time because they are the patent holders and they elect to not license the patents.

I mean if as a user I have to buy add-ons at a cost equal to or greater than the cost of Windows and still lack the full feature set of functionality of a Windows based machine, and those add-ons require a good deal of technical knowledge to implement (no reason for MS to make it easy.) on a Linux box, and all I really am after is compatibility with other Windows machines, it becomes a fools errand to run Linux.

That pretty much wraps up "extinguish".

Ok, you may be able to pick this senario apart for what every reason you think fits, but understand how well this tactic has worked in the past before you dismiss it out of hand. You can bet your bottom dollar MS has...

Posted by: No_Ax_to_Grind   Posted on: 11/10/04 You are currently: a Guest | Members login | Terms of Use

Alert moderator to an offensive message

Subscribe to this discussion via Email or RSS

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

• Using Red Hat Enterprise Linux AS to Achieve Highly Available, Load-Balanced Clusters Dell The Red Hat Enterprise Linux AS operating system integrates Cluster ... Download Now
• Three Steps You Need to Know to Stop Data Loss Varonis Sensitive data exposed to misuse or loss... it is the stuff of nightmares ... Download Now
• Building the Virtualized Enterprise with VMware Iinfrastructure VMware VMware virtualization software has been adopted by over 120,000 enterprise ... Download Now