ZDNet UK


Skip to Main Content

ZDNet.co.uk - Winner of Best Business Website 2007
  1. Home
  2. News
  3. Blogs
  4. Reviews
  5. Prices
  6. Resources
  7. Community
  8. My ZDNet

 

ZDNet UK RSS Feeds


IT Jobs

Enterprise open source Toolkit

Microsoft exec talks patent politics

Tom Espiner ZDNet.co.uk

Published: 25 May 2007 17:13 BST

  • Email
  • Trackback
  • Clip Link
  • Print friendly
  • Post Comment
Microsoft exec talks patent politics

Microsoft's evolving relationship with the open-source community is an object of fascination for many, including some surprised Microsoft employees. ZDNet.co.uk was told at a recent Microsoft event that "strange winds of change are blowing through Redmond" when it comes to the software giant's attitudes to open source and interoperability.

Many in the open-source community remain sceptical about Microsoft's overtures, believing them to be filled with inherent contradictions, such as Microsoft making patent-infringement allegations but also striking a deal with a vendor such as Novell.

Microsoft's UK national technology officer, Jerry Fishenden, talked to ZDNet.co.uk about the necessity of Microsoft specifying exactly which patents Linux has allegedly broken, as well as clarifying its attitude to open-source standards.

Fishenden, the software giant's lead UK technology advisor, also talked to ZDNet.co.uk about the need for a UK security breach disclosure law, and the need for a professional body that could strike off incompetent IT professionals.

Q: With the Microsoft allegations of 235 patent violations by open-source vendors, some in the open-source community are saying this is Microsoft trying to get open-source vendors to use Microsoft licences.
A: It depends where you come from on intellectual property really. As someone who is also a writer, I'm always quite intrigued by the idea that, if I write something, I shouldn't have some sort of rights over what I've produced, and that other people can go off and make money off the back of my creative work. I'm not entirely sure what people are asking — that Microsoft shouldn't protect its intellectual property?

Blog contest

Win tickets for England v West Indies

Anyone for cricket? ZDNet UK is giving away two tickets every day of the npower second test at Headingley Carnegie. Just take part in the Vista Upgrade Blog to enter.

Read more+

I think it's the way that Microsoft has stated that 235 patents have been broken, then refused to specify which patents have been broken, and then said that it isn't going to litigate for now. It's not simply a question of protecting intellectual property.
Yes, well we need to be specific about intellectual property and where the [Linux] violations are, I guess.

What's your reaction to the observation that Microsoft, on the one hand, has to appear to be enforcing its intellectual property for the stakeholders but, on the other hand, is making overtures to the open-source community? Are those two positions irreconcilable?
I don't think so. If you look at all the big companies supporting open source and proprietary — IBM, for example, whose software business grew quite a lot last year based on its proprietary product portfolio — IBM doesn't seem to have a problem with doing both, Sun doesn't have a problem with doing both. I think most companies have that spectrum of open source being pooled and developed in the community, then there's other stuff that's proprietary, and ownership is retained. Microsoft pays well over $1bn [£503m] a year to license other people's intellectual property. The general preference in the industry is to license. That seems to me to be the way most people respect intellectual property.

Some in the open-source community have concerns about Microsoft and interoperability, specifically Microsoft's position on open standards. Microsoft talks about choice between Open XML and other open standards like ODF, but surely you build products on top of a standard and compete at product level, rather than competing at a standards level?
If standards meant that the first standard approved was the only one that you could use, then how would that differ from patents? You're effectively saying this has now got a monopoly on how you will do things.

Well no, not really, because surely the standard is just a specification document that says how a product can be interoperable?
But what if that standard doesn't do what you need it to do? If you take Open XML for example...

Next

Previous

1 2 3


  • Email
  • Trackback
  • Clip Link
  • Print friendly Print with Dell

Did you find this article useful?
11 out of 14 people found this useful



Company/Topic Alerts

Create a new alert from the list below:










Related Jobs

SAP Project Manager - British National

For Security reasons you MUST be a British National. Our exclusive client has an urgent requirement for a SAP Project Manager for an initial 6 month ...

Role: Java, an interest in Eclipse (plug ins) worked with EJBs

Role: Java, an interest in Eclipse (plug ins) worked with EJBs My exclusive client based in Wiltshire are looking for a new member of their team to ...

SAP Programme/Project Manager

The successful candidate is likely to be Degree educated or have equivalent experience, be a member of a professional body (e.g. Project Management : ...

Featured Talkback

Its the applications and device drivers that run on windows that cement its dominance. How many people would fork out hundreds of pounds for Vista if Linux ran all the software and kit they wanted to use.

By: pround

Read full story:
Windows' dominance stifles demand for Linux

Discussions

keithmv keithmv

Password Deadlock

Saturday 26 July 2008, 12:02 PM

2 comments