Here's some big news - Port 25: The Open Source Community at Microsoft
< Back to Blogs
Here's some big news by billhilf on November 02, 2006 10:30PM

Today we announced a very important partnership with Novell that represents a milestone for our industry.  The partnership has technical, business and legal significance for Microsoft, Novell, our customers and the open source community.  I want to break it down into reasonably sized chunks of information to help explain what it is and how we arrived here.

There is often a big ‘elephant in the room’ when discussing Microsoft and Open Source, and that issue is related to intellectual property.  Our business at Microsoft is built on intellectual property, as are many businesses: Apple, Sony, BMW, Amazon, Nike, and the list goes on.  What does this mean?  It’s relatively simple – each day thousands of people come to work at Microsoft to build new technologies that (ideally) make it easier, more efficient, and more enjoyable to use a computer.  We pay these people to do this and then we sell their work through our products.  We then use that money to continue to pay these people to keep innovating and building new things that meet the above goal and the cycle goes on and on.  Like the other companies I listed above, we protect the intellectual property from these innovations through patents, copyrights, trademarks and trade secrets (the four parts of intellectual property).  Use an iPod?  The menu structure driven by that little wheel is protected by patents that Apple owns.  Wear Nike shoes?  The layering of those soles and their contents are protected by patents and the Nike ‘swoosh is a protected trademark of Nike.  Used Red Hat’s update service?  That is also protected by a patent application. Even that soda you got at McDonald’s was likely delivered through this interesting invention.  This is the world of intellectual property and apart from opinions on the governance of this system, this is how it works today.

Microsoft’s intellectual property is almost entirely in software innovations (no surprise) so it was very important for us to have a model where our intellectual property continues to be valued and respected by all constituencies, including the commercial open source world.  Again, our business (as many are) is rooted in intellectual property so this is a non-trivial issue.  Our agreement with Novell provides a way for Microsoft and Novell to keep square on one another’s patents and it provides a way for us to pass on the benefits to customers who want to know these complex issues have been sorted out.  At the same time, we’ve got to do all this in a way that works for those open source developers who contribute code for the love of technology, not for the paycheck.  Microsoft is stepping up and saying we won’t assert patents against individual, non-compensated developers for the code they write.  What does all this mean?  It means that we have a way to work through (or bridge) the open source and Microsoft issues around intellectual property by defining a line between commercial and non-commercial use of our intellectual property.  Additionally Novell’s customers can feel confident that they are clear and compliant (at minimum with Microsoft) of the open source products they buy and deploy from Novell.

Figuring out this model unlocked a variety of new areas that we can collaborate on together, such as the work we’ll be doing around Virtualization, Office file formats and management technologies.  Here are some of the highlights:

Patent coverage

      • The concern over potential patent infringements makes some people nervous about the deployment of open source technologies.
      • From the start, a design principle of the agreement was to be compatible with the GPL.
      • To do this, Novell and Microsoft are providing covenants to each other’s customers, therefore releasing each company from the other’s patent portfolio. This may sounds odd vs. a traditional patent cross-license agreement but it is one of the things that makes this deal so unique.
      • What it really means is that customers deploying technologies from Novell and Microsoft no longer have to fear about possible lawsuits or potential patent infringement from either company.

Development: Virtualization

      • Microsoft and Novell will collaborate in enhancing and developing the functionality required to efficiently virtualize Windows on Linux and Linux on Windows. 
      • Both will now be first class citizens in data centers, addressing the needs of mixed environments. They will both enjoy optimized, supported and tuned device drivers to maximize their potential.

Development: Virtualization Management

      • As a plus, the companies will work together to implement the necessary standards to manage data centers that run mixed environments (WS-Management).
      • Novell will develop tools to manage virtualized Windows machines, and Microsoft will develop tools to manage virtualized Linux systems.

Office Open XML

      • Novell engineers have been working for the last year together with Microsoft engineers through the ECMA TC45 working group in producing a complete specification that would allow for interoperability across office suites.
      • Novell will develop the code necessary to bring support for Office Open XML into OpenOffice, and will contribute that support back to the OpenOffice.org organization. Novell will also distribute the Office Open XML plug-in in their own edition of OpenOffice. In addition, Novell will participate in the Open XML Translator open source project.

Mono, OpenOffice and Samba

      • Under the patent agreement, customers will receive coverage for Mono, Samba, and OpenOffice as well as .NET and Windows Server.-All of these technologies will be improved upon during the 5 years of the agreement and there are some limits on the coverage that would be provided for future technologies added to these offerings.
      • The collaboration framework we have put in place allows us to work on complex subjects such as this where intellectual property and innovation are important parts of the conversation.

We’re also building a joint research facility where Microsoft and Novell technical experts will architect and test new software solutions, and will work with customers and the community to build and support these technologies (read: cool big new lab with all sorts of gear and tinkering going on).

I’ve been in the open source world for over twelve years and I have worked with thousands of customers worldwide who use commercial and open source software.  I have been part of the large deal team working on this partnership for a long time now.  In my opinion, this is the most important bridge ever developed between Microsoft and open source and *significantly* helps customers and hobbyist developers have the peace of mind that they need and have asked for.  As Steve Ballmer said today, “They said it couldn’t be done” but we did and I’m personally very proud to have been part of this bridge building.

It’s been a long and exciting day so now a few of us from Microsoft and Novell are going to go get some sleep Smile

 

 

Comments RSS
  1. posted at 03:02AM 11/03/2006
  2. Ieri il presidente e CEO di Novell, Ronal W.Hovsepian, e il CEO di Microsoft Steve Ballmer hanno annunciato

    posted at 04:16AM 11/03/2006
  3. liquidat said:

    I have to admit I really had to smile when you started to write about patents: you elegantly mixed idea/algorithm patents with industry patents, thousands of MS's patents with just a couple of Red Hat patents (filled for defence against patent trolls) and all over all did not even bother to mention the big war on idea and algorithm patents taking place in all developed nations. Well done...

    However, there is one thing I would like to point out: the most used Licence of Open Source/Free Software is the GPL. Section 7 states that you are not allowed to redestribute software if there are patent problems.

    How does this fit together with the contract between MS and Novell? The contract covers only Novell software and other, non-company software developers - which is against the GPL (who is made for *everyone* with no exclusion).

    Although I understand that you are not allowed to discuss the patent stuff I mentioned in the first paragraph, I think a bit more light on the GPL problems would be nice here. How about inviting a MS lawyer to speak about the video? I think it would be a nice opportunity to also speak about this contract and explain it a bit more detailed to the audience.

    posted at 05:10AM 11/03/2006
  4. marty said:

    > How does this fit together with the contract between MS and Novell?

    > The contract covers only Novell software and other, non-company

    > software developers - which is against the GPL (who is made for

    > *everyone* with no exclusion).

    It doesn't fit: http://gregdek.livejournal.com/5830.html

    posted at 09:19AM 11/03/2006
  5. Snowballs are also reported to be seen in hell... :) No seriously - we have and it makes sense . I've

    posted at 10:51AM 11/03/2006
  6. posted at 11:50AM 11/03/2006
  7. I've gotten quite a few questions about what this partnership means, but I think the best response is

    posted at 04:54PM 11/03/2006
  8. fluke said:

    It is true that RedHat does have a patent on the RHN service.  But it also has it's own promise policy on patents that greatly predates the MS-OSP.  In fact, several companies have a promise policy regarding FOSS including IBM, HP, Sun, SGI, Novell, etc.  The idea that giving away a piece of IP to help the industry is worth more to a company goes back to the transistor and ethernet.  But even when MS was trying to promote Sender-ID as a standard they where unacceptably late in getting with the program.  Even worse, companies like Eolas Technologies and Immersion Corporation make it clear that patent reform is badly over-due, Microsoft still won't make promoting such a change high priority.  Any press releases promoting patent reform are provided quietly and never result in anything on Microsoft main web page.

    "Our business at Microsoft is built on intellectual property, as are many businesses..."

    "Microsoft’s intellectual property is almost entirely in software innovations..."

    No, Microsoft business is built on EULAs.  

    Yes, other companies, like Nike, have a lot of IP built into their products.  But which I choose to buy is sold on their own merits.  If I get an "Air Jordan" over their vanilla tennis show, it is because I want the additional IP that went into it.  Nike doesn't claim that I can't buy a vanilla tennis show based on what socks I wear, if I use nail polish on my toes or what car I drive.

    So, lets look at what "merits" vista is being sold under...

    Can I use Vista Home Basic on VMware or Xen?  No, it is a violation of the EULA to do so.

    Can I use Vista Home Premium on VMware or Xen?  Nope!  Same reason as before!

    So since I'm required to buy Ultimate, what features do I get?

    Aero Glass?  No, it should be used outside a VM.

    Media Center?  No, it should be used outside a VM.

    Premium Games like 3D Chess?  No, it should be used outside a VM.

    BitLocker?  No, it is a violation of the EULA.

    ...

    Huh!  Wait.  Lets take a step back for a second.  To run Vista in a VM I must buy a version that includes BitLocker but I'm not allowed to use the feature I was required to buy inside the VM?  Wow!  In fact, some features of Media Center may include DRM material which also may not be used inside a VM.

    So, can I at least use one copy of Ultimate edition to boot directly and in the VM but never both at the same time?  Nope--since the VM presents a different set of emulated hardware than running the OS on the machine directly, this would violate the WGA check.

    I think I now understand why helping the Xen project is important to Microsoft.  As long as I use Linux as my primary desktop and use Windows inside a VM, Microsoft EULA requires that I purchase features that either:

     - I do not need,

     - I do not want

     - or I can not use

    CodeWeaver's CrossOver Professional for $70 looks like it more likely to "make it easier, more efficient, and more enjoyable to use a computer."  I understand Microsoft's needs to make money to pay it's employees.  I just don't understand it's need to require I pay for Vista Ultimate just to it Windows in a VM.  Microsoft's "solution" to virtualization does not seem to have any of my interests in mind.

    "In my opinion, this is the most important bridge ever developed between Microsoft and open source and *significantly* helps customers and hobbyist developers have the peace of mind that they need and have asked for."

    I am a customer and a hobbyist developer but with the way Microsoft is treating potential Xen users, I don't feel there is any bridge being built in my direction.  I just feel like Microsoft is trying to find a way to rip me off!

    "As Steve Ballmer said today, 'They said it couldn’t be done' but we did and I’m personally very proud to have been part of this bridge building."

    You have built a bridge with *companies* that have been involved in FOSS.  This is very different from building a bridge with the FOSS community as a whole.  You do have good reason to be proud of by having built such a bridge but if that is the only target of Microsoft then why even bother wasting the resources with the Port 25 site?  Take a look at this:

    - I brought up that I would be willing to create plug-in to providing binding in the Python language allowing additional VS plugins to be created in Python but the current Visual Studio SDK license makes doing so illegal.

    - You stated that current situation is good enough for MySQL (a FOSS related *company*) and then no improvement to the VS SDK license is ever further discussed.  No bridge to proceed with the project ever occurs.

    - I said that I would like to improve the ssod software and distribute rpm packaged versions of it.

    - JDZ says he will look into it and then leaves me in limbo.  No additional discussion takes place on Port 25 about changing the terms to ssod.  However, (if I read the press releases correctly) Microsoft would honor a request by Novell (a *company* related to FOSS) to improve and distribute ssod if they ever bother to ask.

    - I now join Scott Granneman (another FOSS member but not FOSS company) in saying that the Vista EULAs are not acceptable.  Not only does this burn bridges with potential Xen users but VMware and Parallels as well.  This artificial restriction on what can run in a VM just is not acceptable.  I am fine with paying a retail price of $400 for Ultimate edition if I want those features but to be locked into it just to run on a VM is a bunch of crap.  This greatly reduces the usefulness of having Xen on a desktop.

    - And the Port 25 response since the request on building this bridge does not come from a company is predictably...

    I was sold on Microsoft statements on what Cairo would be.  It lead me to FOSS.  Cairo was said to be a set of modules where you only bought what you need.  Microsoft still does not deliver that.  You want to use (even someone else's) a VM then buy a more expensive bundle much be bought.  Port 25 has reiterated concepts from Cairo with discussion of OSes becoming service personalities on a micro-kernel.  But if Microsoft could ever deliver on it, why do I get the feeling it would be under terms most people wouldn't accept.  Maybe it is because Windows running with boot-camp can be had for $200 or $240, but run Windows on top of a Darwin micro-kernel then it requires $100 or $200 more.

    The Windows 95 project named based on the "Windy City" where the politicians where all talk.  I get the feeling that maybe we should call Port 25 the Windy Blog.  But thanks for the highlights.  It makes me feel good that Microsoft is "supporting" FOSS hobbyist developers to use virtualization like Xen.  *wink*

    posted at 07:32PM 11/03/2006
  9. It is particulary myopic to present the hoary strategy of "Embrace, Extend, Extinguish" as a new departure for Microsoft.

    Microsoft has purchased a partner willing to allow its precious binary "blobs" to be inserted into Linux Server systems.

    Unless these binaries are opened and free to all, Microsoft has done nothing more than create a 'incompatible' extension.  

    Microsoft has already telegraphed its endgame.   Ballmer is explictly threatening patent extortion directed at the users of other distributions.

    posted at 10:42AM 11/04/2006
  10. billhilf said:

    Let me clarify a few things.  First, opinions of the patent issue are separate from having to work within the existing patent system.  Reality is the USPTO as it stands today (in the US at least) and I know many people have strong opinions about patents, but it's important to realize that *types* of patents and *motivations* for filing patents (issues liquidat raises) are irrelevant to how companies must work in the current world:  a filed patent is a filed patent, they are not distinguished by types or ‘why’ someone might have filed it.  This is the system that intellectual property creating businesses work within today.  However, Microsoft is working with other companies (such as HP, IBM and Red Hat) on exploring new models for patents, such as the Community Patent Review system.

    And on the GPL issue, we have developed a way for this agreement to be GPL compliant - that was obviously critical and we spent a tremendous amount of time on this, with dozens of the best legal minds on the planet.  The framework we created is one of the most innovative aspect of this overall deal.  I am working with the team on getting this explained a bit more, which we will update in the FAQ.

    posted at 01:42PM 11/04/2006
Post a Comment
*
*