On Mon, 2007-04-09 at 15:08 -0700, Alan Dayley wrote:
> Alex Dean wrote:
> > Micah DesJardins wrote:
> >> It basically lays
> >> the groundwork for MS to try to enforce their software patents against
> >> those who might be using them without paying a license fee.
> >>   
> > My question from the beginning of this has been "which patents?".  Does 
> > anyone know what intellectual property of Microsoft's that Linux distros 
> > are allegedly infringing on?  I've never heard anyone actually spell 
> > that out, or even speculate on it.
> 
> Neither Novell nor MS will specify the patents involved.  Giving the
> benefit of the doubt, Novell probably can't per terms of the agreement.
>  (BTW, all the terms of the agreement have not be made public, nor are
> they likely ever to be.)

People at Novell have stated that they don't know of any patents that
they are violating of MS's.  I think this is more likely to quell the
concerns of pointy haired bosses who keep telling Novell sales reps.
that they won't buy Linux because they're sure "MS will legally crush
them" in the future.  Now the Novell sales reps can say "no" with proof
that the pointy haired bosses can understand.

I think that it's less about licensing patents they needed, and more
about crushing the arguments of people unwilling to adopt Linux.  I've
met these people, you've met these people, logic and law aren't going to
convince them they're being stupid, hopefully this will...

		--Ted