Women in Technology

Article:		Linux and Patent Risks
Subject:		No guarantee of indemnification with proprietary software, either
Date:		2004-08-10 18:50:08
From:		Paul_Robinson
As Ravicher explained, the cost of proprietary software includes some amount of patent insurance. The vendor of the software takes on the risk of defending its users against patent claims made by other parties. Don't you believe it. Here's a quote from almost any of Microsoft's EULAs (End User License Agreements): NO WARRANTIES. TO THE MAXIMUM EXTENT PERMITTED BY APPLICABLE LAW, MICROSOFT AND ITS SUPPLIERS DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES AND CONDITIONS, EITHER EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, TITLE AND NON-INFRINGEMENT, WITH REGARD TO THE SOFTWARE PRODUCT So Microsoft will not even warrant that the code it has sold you is non-infringing. If some code by Microsoft infringes some patent, MS can tell you that you're on your own and you'll probably have no recourse against them.

Showing messages 1 through 1 of 1.

• Don't assume that you are safer using Microsoft
  2004-08-11 04:42:50  nzheretic [View]
  
  
  Even Microsoft License 6 customers are not provided much protection by Microsoft's extended enterprise warrenty. Microsoft does not cover you for any code written by the customer or third parties, even if the infringing IP is in Microsoft's own code using Microsoft's provided API.

  An example of this is Microsoft's licensing of patented technology for only itself without granting the right for end users and developers to use the same patented technology. Microsoft licensed Database/Datawarehouse technology from Timeline Inc, but unlike Oracle and other database vendors, Microsoft chose a license that did not grant Microsoft's customers the right to fully use that technology. Timeline has extended it's patent claims to cover many featured widely used by developers , both ISV and in house.

  Timeline Inc has won a US
  Washington Court of Appeal judgment against Microsoft
  for the right to sue Microsoft's customers, and
  subsequently sued Cognos. On February 13, 2004, Cognos settled at cost to Cognos totaling $1.75 million

  
  In a lot of ways you are better with GPL licensed techology
  , which effectively grants all downstream users the
  right to use the patents from upstream developers under the terms of the GPL.

  
  Software Patent are inherently bad but are also pushing an interesting trend. Pushing vendors towards adopting the GPL-like licensing as a form of simpler form of cross licensing arrangement.