Did TomTom test Microsoft's Linux patent lock-down?
No choice but to kill open source
SaaS data loss: The problem you didn’t know you had
Microsoft's prosecution of TomTom over alleged violation of patents is looking increasingly like a failure in its long-running policy of tying down Linux users through cross licensing of its IP.
Computerworld has dredged up an email exchange with Microsoft's IP and licensing legal chief that explains Microsoft's got a long history of licensing its File Allocation Table/Long File Name (FAT LFN) with companies in the car navigation space and that have specifically been using Linux and open source.
Microsoft's corporate vice president and deputy general counsel of intellectual property and licensing Horacio Gutierrez said 18 companies had signed up, including Kenwood, Alpine, and Pioneer.
According to Computerworld:
"When asked specifically if "there are companies using Linux and open-source software, which have signed FAT patent cross-licensing agreements, such as the ones, which TomTom has refused to agree to?" Gutierrez replied, "Yes, other companies have signed FAT patent licenses, both in the context of patent cross licensing agreements and other licensing arrangements."
Microsoft in earlier statements has insisted the case is not about Linux and Gutierrez denied this was the first step in a series of suits over a claimed 235 cases of Microsoft patents being violated by free and open-source software. It's worth noting that Gutierrez was one of the Microsoft legal eagles who claimed in 2007 that free and open-source software infringes those 200-plus patents. TomTom US has refused to comment on the case.
Contrary to what Microsoft may state about this not being about Linux, tying up companies that use Linux and open source in patent licensing agreements cuts to the very core of one of the things that's kept Linux and open-source alive: free distribution of the kernel and code.
Samba maintainer Jeremy Allison pointed out in a recent blog posting by writer Glyn Moody that companies who sign up to Microsoft's licensing cannot continue to distribute their code under GPLv2.
Section seven of GPLv2 - called the "Liberty or Death" clause - states that you cannot distribute code if outside restrictions have been imposed.
"What people are missing about this is the either/or choice that Microsoft is giving TomTom," Alison posted.
"It isn't a case of cross-license and everything is ok. If TomTom or any other company cross licenses patents then by section 7 of GPLv2 (for the Linux kernel). they lose the rights to redistribute the kernel *at all*."
In other words, Microsoft is eroding Linux and open source and slowing their development. A deal with Microsoft prevents GPL'd code from returning to the ecosystem whence it came, with any improvements or updates, as companies that do patent licensing deals with Microsoft must keep it in-house.
This is particularly damaging for Linux, given consumer electronics companies such as those Microsoft is tying up are making heavy use of Linux in devices from in-car systems to TVs and DVD players and could potentially return their improvements to the kernel to the market.
One reason these companies have turned to Linux and open source rather than use Windows is because of the simple expense of licensing Windows, and the fact the code is not open so they cannot make changes needed to run gadgets and devices.
"Make no mistake, this is intended to force TomTom to violate the GPL, or change to Microsoft embedded software," Allison wrote. ®
COMMENTS
NDA so people don't know they are paying up.
I have read this in detail.
http://blogs.computerworld.com/linux_companies_sign_microsoft_patent_protection_pacts
18 companies including Kenwood, Alpine and Pioneer according to Horacio Gutierrez of MS (Isn't that violation of the NDA they signed) are using GPL
I could not figure out why someone would not want you to know their software could read a now 28 year old file format with a method of supporting long file names which is at least 10 years old.
So what would happen if you approached one of them and asked for a copy of the source for one of their devices?
Logic says the should say "Sorry its closed source." If they don't MS can presumably do them later, and anyone who got source off them and hence is "infected." As others have noted it creates a 2 tier customer base. Those who have rights to MS elements and everyone else.
Tom tom seem to be taking a different route.
Feeding a large hungry troll is no way to get rid of them. It makes them larger. It does not lessen their hunger.
What's the problem?
TomTom shouldn't be using FAT file systems - the correct one for their product is JFFS. FAT is just used on removable lightweight devices like USB sticks for compatibility with things like Microsoft.
Its a dicey licence to play with anyway. FAT predates Microsoft by a good few years but you wouldn't expect a lawyer to know that.
If Linux is a pain then you can always do what lots of networking companies do -- switch to FreeBSD based product. Its a bit more work to use but its totally open. I wouldn't switch to using CE; its never proved to be much use, its big, slow and clumsy and, of course, relatively expensive.
@AC 14:37
> > BTW I would have thought it should be easy to support ext3 or whatever on windows, just insert an auto run exe file[...]''
> What fs type will you use for the partition that contains this exe? You can't make it ext3 (or whatever) because the user would need to have the driver installed already, and you can't make it FAT for the very reasons we're having this discussion.
ISO9660
However autorun is a major malware vector so in a locked-down environment you won't be able to run the executable.
IT infrastructure monitoring strategies
Requirements Checklist for Choosing a Cloud Backup and Recovery Service Provider
Data control in the cloud
Cloud based data management
Enabling efficient data center monitoring
