I’m not sure if legal issues regarding open source or free software, being forced to a head, will be beneficial or positive for users of that software, at least here in the United States. I don’t think anyone wants this forced to a head. Win win win for Sun and Microsoft all around.
Openoffice software#
I think until issues about free software and the law are resolved, the smart companies will cynically exploit the uncertainty, and they will reap cash rewards for it. Keeps any potential rise (if it’s even likely or possible that desktop Linux is or will be a threat) of desktop Linux in corporations at a sluggish, or stagnant, pace. Preserving the uncertainty stops widespread adoptation by business, while not entailing the PR disaster of actually suing OO.org users. In a way it’s the best of all worlds for them. I don’t think they really want to sue anyone, but they like the chilling factor of the uncertainty. Microsoft – I’m just betting – likes the situation just as it is. Meanwhile of course Sun gets the development effort free on OpenOffice. Nor, since OpenOffice itself doesn’t bring in direct revenue to Sun, is it in Sun’s interest for millions to use OpenOffice rather than StarOffice.
I see shrewd business.Īs the article indicated, Sun probably didn’t have anything to trade to Microsoft to indemnify OpenOffice users. The OS movement has proven that when attacked it is far worse than stirring up a hornets nest. As a proprietary software provider, not only could you lose a case because a cross paten claim proves to be more valid than your own – but you may find that you have stepped on patens that belong to people in the OS movement. This will therefore make using patens to block software development an unreliable and dangerous action, in that it could well backfire. This will greatly increase the cost and difficulty of enforcement of patens in general. Further filing all these patens will cause many cross claims as well. All others must negate a use cost.ĭoing this will place many proprietary software venders in a bind unless they are willing to trade the use of their patens for those that are in the Open Source Pool.
Openoffice license#
Then release these under a license that is basically a free to open source and those that release their patens to free to open source. The open source community needs to start patenting everything that we feel we did first and I mean everything. I have said this before and will say it again now. The way I see it, Sun may or may not be planning to betray the OSS community, but as far as I’m concerned the OSS community wasn’t and isn’t looking for “friends” anyway. (Also note that members of a community don’t always see eye-to-eye on every issue, etc. I mean seriously here, a lot of people say Sun is no friend of OSS, but since when do friends see eye-to-eye on every issue? Since when does a friend (Sun) always do what they are told to do by their friend (OSS community)? And sometimes friends can be friends with people who are not friends with the rest of their friends (Microsoft). All this “whining” about Sun (historically and today) basicly amounts to one thing, “You don’t do everything we tell you to do, so we’re pissed.” Not too much of a difference really, either way it was their intellectual property and they gave it to the community.
Openoffice code#
They did nothing with it, and StarOffice only improved AFTER they released the source code and derived StarOffice 6 from 1.0. HagerR15: Sun didn’t develop StarOffice, they bought it for a pittance from a software author in Germany and called it Sun StarOffice 5. Don’t ever waste your time giving code you paid developers to create to the open source community. They are using just enough leverage to force bussiness’ from using alternative office suites.Īnonymous: If you are a member of the closed source community (Sun), let this be a lesson to you. This would be a political nighmare for mircosoft to sue a community of users. “Bishop’s report in the Seattle Post-Intelligencer states that “Microsoft declined to say whether it is contemplating any patent-related litigation against OpenOffice licensees, or on what grounds it would base any suit of that sort.”Īll this leads up to tatics to impose fear on the community. “Although suing users or distributors of OpenOffice and upsetting the European Union might not be in Microsoft’s business interests, some of Redmond’s actions on other fronts create reasonable doubts about the company’s intentions when it comes to intellectual property and open source. Egger believes it’s not in Microsoft’s business interests.” Others believe that it could draw the attention of trustbusters. Some believe it would be a PR disaster for Microsoft to start bullying the open-source community. Most experts consider such legal action unlikely. “Would Microsoft sue OpenOffice licensees? Microsoft hasn’t said yes, but it hasn’t said no, either.
0 kommentar(er)
