

Microsoft Patent Checkmate - wglb
http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20090908164954318

======
barrkel
I'm not seeing the conspiracy, sorry. What evidence is there that MS selling
patents to AST was part of an evil plan? AIUI, AST (Allied Security Trust)
isn't known as a patent troll.

AST members include: Verizon, Cisco, Google, Telefon AB L.M., Ericsson, HP.
Source:

[http://blog.tmcnet.com/blog/rich-tehrani/patent/allied-
secur...](http://blog.tmcnet.com/blog/rich-tehrani/patent/allied-security-
trust----let-the-patent-wars-begin.html)

If "not inviting" OIN was part of the conspiracy, surely a group that included
Google shouldn't have been included either.

AST on their website even assert that they don't assert patents against
infringers:

> Will AST assert these patents against infringers?

> No. The purpose of AST is to provide the freedom to sell products and cost
> reduction. Member companies who wish to participate in a particular patent
> purchase are granted a worldwide non-exclusive patent license.

Source: <http://www.alliedsecuritytrust.com/q-and-a.html>

This is a non-story.

~~~
bad_user
I don't see the conspiracy either. They could have sold those patents
privately, not with a bid.

What I think happened is that Microsoft wanted some quick money out of patents
they aren't using anyway (we are in an economic crisis after all), and so they
organized a bid failing to invite OIN ... and maybe they did that such that
OIN doesn't get them (the patents being acquired by a patent troll being the
ideal scenario).

But that's not an "evil conspiracy". And I'm getting pretty tired of Groklaw
and FSF crying wolf every time MS farts.

As they say, your real enemies are the ones you hate. You want to change the
status quo? Competition and collaboration are the best tools you have. Not
FUD.

~~~
ZeroGravitas
The word "evil" gets bandied around far too easily, but if I'm reading you
right then you acknowledge that Microsoft may have planned to feed ammunition
to patent trolls, you just dispute whether that is "evil" or just "good
business".

I'd say it's a pretty shitty thing to do and, while you can't prove what the
motive was, Microsoft has a history of doing equally shitty things to damage
its competitors (and collaborators!).

------
JacobAldridge
Without knowing how much MS sold them for, there's another possibility.

"We don't want to sue Linux, but we want to make them pay...Hmmm, what if we
'auction' these patents, knowing they're of most value to OIN etc so a related
organisation will pay top dollar."

It's probably not as much money as a massive lawsuit, but it's much cleaner,
and doesn't tarnish the reputation or line lawyer pockets.

------
kenshi
Well imagine if MS did hold an auction and invited parties interested in
promoting Linux. What would the reaction have been like? I can imagine lots of
"MS screws Linux via extortion 'auction' process" stories flying around on the
internet on such a day. Or how about, "Proprietary software company stifles
Free Software innovation using Patents".

Regardless of their intent, there is no way MS will ever get any positive
reaction from the majority of the "open source community" (I use that term
lightly - I think everyone who reads this will know which, very vocal parties
I mean though).

It's hard to do business with people who are constantly demonizing you. Is it
any surprise MS wont make much of an effort engaging with such parties?

Patents + Linux = PR disaster for MS no matter what. The best they could ever
do is minimize the damage.

------
shin_lao
So basically someone gave money to Microsoft for patents they could probably
never have been able to enforce?

Wow, Microsoft really got screwed up again...

------
jacquesm
The only way forward with software patents is to start ignoring them _en
masse_.

By buying up these patents effectively the message is we respect the authority
these patents pretend to convey.

I've had the video patent trolls after me for a while, they wanted a piece of
the action on ww.com because of their broad ranging patent on 'video over the
internet'.

I told them to put up and sue or go away (only in less nice terms). I never
heard from them again.

It's nice that big companies like Oracle and IBM carry a torch for open
source. But that's only because they realize that in the long run the days of
closed source software are numbered.

There is no such thing as software patent infringement, there is such a thing
as a software copyright violation.

Software is the ultimate vehicle to embody ideas in strings of numbers, your
unique string is yours, the ideas embodied in that string are public domain
the moment you publish.

If you do not want that then please, do not publish and keep your secrets to
yourself. The world will be a better place because of it.

Any company that ever sued because of a software patent was a patent troll, no
single software patent ever awarded should have been awarded in the first
place.

And don't get me started about patents on genes.

------
recampbell
Red Hat's comments:

"The Open Invention Network (OIN) learned recently that Microsoft was planning
to auction off some of its software patents, which we understand it marketed
to trolls and some other non-practicing entities. It also used marketing
materials that highlighted offensive uses of the patents against open source
software, including a number of the most popular open source packages."

[http://press.redhat.com/2009/09/09/microsoft-and-patent-
trol...](http://press.redhat.com/2009/09/09/microsoft-and-patent-trolls/)

------
jcl
It seems these patents were mainly 3D graphics-related:
[http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/09/08/microsoft_sgi_patent...](http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/09/08/microsoft_sgi_patents_oin/)

So these patents probably don't apply to the Linux kernel, but may apply to
other open-source software.

------
nkassis
If it's true than it's pretty hilarious. Karma might just have bitten back. I
wonder how much they went for?

Also why wouldn't Intellectual ventures have just inherited of them? Seems
like they would be perfect people to do the evil deed.

------
tybris
They got money for thin air. Microsoft is simply better at doing business than
anyone else. Stop the silly envy.

------
GrandMasterBirt
It is overdramatized but I have to point one thing out. MS can't sue linux.
Period. Asside from bad PR there is one major problem: MS is already accused
of monopolising the market. Thus suing linux providers will only hurt their
cause. Instead it is better if other companies do it. Or maybe they do/don't
care about it but they just want to rid themselves of these patents so they
can claim "we are letting linux die because MS makes a superior product, not
because we are trying to kill of linux with legal red-tape".

It may have been coencidence that linux got the stuff, it may be that AST made
a profit buying and re-selling. In any case while MS might be evil we
definately got another kind of evil sitting on the other fence keeping MS in
check.

Nothing to see here, move along.

