decoration decoration
Stories

GROKLAW
When you want to know more... 		decoration
For layout only
Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines
ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books

Gear

Groklaw Gear

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.

You won't find me on Facebook

Donate

Donate Paypal

No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.

What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments

Sponsors

Hosting:
hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster
Linus on Patents, Innovation . . . and Groklaw
Wednesday, August 18 2004 @ 02:19 PM EDT

BusinessWeek has done an interview with Linus you won't want to miss. He talks about how he structures everything, or watches structure evolve. It's fascinating, to me especially, because actually I didn't really know how to run Groklaw when thousands of volunteers suddenly showed up. There is no manual when you are the first person to try something, and who do you ask? I had only the general open source model as a star to guide me.

It's been very much an experiment, so it's nice to learn that his structure is kind of like I see developing here, with certain differences built in due to the different nature of the finished work. Anyway, it's a very intriguing interview to me, and I think you'll enjoy reading it, maybe from your own perspective.

Linus talks about the open source method for developing software and says when problems get serious enough, you can't have one individual or one company hording all the knowledge, that open source is a better way to do software, and that sharing knowledge results in more stable software.

He also says the one thing that worries him isn't that Linux has legal problems, but that some greedy companies -- and you know who you are -- might decide to game the system, now that Linux is so successful, and like the rest of us, software patents are a concern to him:

"The only things I worry about are all the things that go around the project. Part of it is legal issues.
It's not that I think Linux has legal problems, but that the system doesn't work as well as it should,
and crazy things happen, like the SCO suits . . . .

"Software patents concern me. I worry about some greedy companies -- possibly failing ones,
trying to make trouble and abusing the system. Software patents, in particular, are very ripe for
abuse. The whole system encourages big corporations getting thousands and thousands of patents.
Individuals almost never get them."

He doesn't think Microsoft will use patents against Linux, because he says he thinks they'd be ashamed. You need to read the whole interview, to really get the full flavor.

He also answers a FUD question: is open source a threat to US leadership in innovation? Here's a master at work:

"Q: The U.S. has long been a leader in information-technology innovation. Is open source a threat to its national competitiveness?

"A: Open source is a tool anybody can use to innovate. It's a tool the U.S. can use or other countries can use. If you want to keep on the forefront of technology, you have to take advantage of the most powerful tools, and open source is one of them. Other countries will take full advantage of open source, and it allows them to innovate and leave the U.S. behind -- if it doesn't innovate, too."

But my favorite thing he said was this, about Groklaw:

"Q: How applicable are open-source methods outside of software? Is the nature of software and the culture in which it has developed unique in business? Or are other kinds of businesses or creative endeavors using some of the same methods?

"A: I think the method is the scientific method. The open-source people use it for software. So, engineering and science are all about the open-source method. It's mainly about knowledge and information. You can spread it without losing it yourself. Groklaw.com is the open-source mentality applied to legal research."

Sometimes people write to me and ask about doing a Groklaw T-shirt. Groklaw is a noncommercial site, so I can't sell T-shirts, but I usually give individuals who ask for permission my OK to do it just for themselves. And now, when they ask me what I'd like it to say, here's my answer:

"Groklaw is the open-source mentality applied to legal research" ~ Linus Torvalds

SCO may not get it, and that's fine. Heaven only knows their keynote speaker missed the boat. But it's satisfying to know that Linus understands exactly what we are trying to do here.


  


Linus on Patents, Innovation . . . and Groklaw | 302 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
Offtopic material here
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 18 2004 @ 03:44 PM EDT
Thanks

[ Reply to This | # ]

I had only the general open source model as a star to guide me.
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 18 2004 @ 03:45 PM EDT
That was so beautiful,PJ.
The Star is shining on You.
You ARE a Star.
You are THE Star.

[ Reply to This | # ]

  • Cobweb minds - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 18 2004 @ 04:06 PM EDT
Corrections and all that Jazz
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 18 2004 @ 03:46 PM EDT
you know what to do

[ Reply to This | # ]

Linus on Groklaw
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 18 2004 @ 03:55 PM EDT
"Groklaw is the open-source mentality applied to legal research" ~
Linus Torvalds

I sincerely hope that was meant to sound like a compliment.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Freedom and zero sum games
Authored by: dyfet on Wednesday, August 18 2004 @ 03:56 PM EDT
I particularly found this part interesting...

"Q: The U.S. has long been a leader in information-technology innovation. Is open source a threat to its national competitiveness?

"A: Open source is a tool anybody can use to innovate. It's a tool the U.S. can use or other countries can use. If you want to keep on the forefront of technology, you have to take advantage of the most powerful tools, and open source is one of them. Other countries will take full advantage of open source, and it allows them to innovate and leave the U.S. behind -- if it doesn't innovate, too."

What too many people focus on is the idea that if X is successful, this must be at the expense of Y. Traditional proprietary software also divides the market into a zero sum game of winners and loosers, and to win somebody else has to loose.

One thing real freedom does for software, is to say there are no fixed boundry of what can be created. and hence that Y does not have to fail for X to be successful. Rather than fighting for space in a fixed size market, one needs to think of an expanding universe of possibilities or the idea of a shared tide that raises all boats. Of course those that choose to be remain in the past on shore will get left behind. While I do not know if this is what he meant to say, this is what I get from Linus's statement.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Linus on... Groklaw
Authored by: icebarron on Wednesday, August 18 2004 @ 04:05 PM EDT
I love it when this guy talks, it is simple, clear, and very affective. It's a
shame he doesn't have time to really discuss things with us more. He is
definately THE leader....of Linux


Peace to one and all

Dan

[ Reply to This | # ]

Thanks, Congradulations, and Me Too's
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 18 2004 @ 04:13 PM EDT
Here please.

BTW PJ: Thanks :)

[ Reply to This | # ]

Proprietary = Witchcraft?
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 18 2004 @ 04:14 PM EDT
Or did I read it wrong?

[ Reply to This | # ]

One wish
Authored by: IMANAL on Wednesday, August 18 2004 @ 04:31 PM EDT
Groklaw is great!

My only wish is to get some sort of score system, very much like they have on
Slashdot, where I only read scores with 3+

Pleeeease, PJ?

[ Reply to This | # ]

OSS In Other Words...
Authored by: BitOBear on Wednesday, August 18 2004 @ 04:43 PM EDT
Art is not Economic.
Science is not Economic.

Economic interests may leverage Art or Science, but if those interests attempt
to convert the persuit of Art or Science into pure Economics, whatever they are
doing stops being Art or Science.

Hua...?

In point of fact, economists refer to their realm as "the dismal
science" because the golden rule of economics is "All economies fail,
you simply have to make sure that, at whatever level you are compeeting,
everybody else's economy fails faster than your own."

Put another way: Of the four phases of economy, those being Inflation,
Stagnation, Recession, and Depression, which one is good? The answer is, it
depends on which way and how well you bet.

In order to manufacture an Economy you have to "invent into the
system" two key elements, scarcity and control. A "software
business" by definition needs to use secrecy and the law (patents etc) to
manufacture scarcity and control.

It's kind of funny to see a software company propose its business and then
lament (or be derrided for) it's lack of art.

By definition "smart people who are willing to help 'no matter what'"
are, for any field, a natural scarcity. So this is why software service is a
natural economic model.

Successful OSS (as a business) relies on a dual-sided proposition.

In general there are a bunch of people who want to create something for a
purpose of their own (because they need it or it apeals to them as art).

Meanwhile there is a larger population of people who want to use that something,
a small portion of whom would be willing to take money to bolster (support)
particular users particular uses.

An OSS project becomes successful to the degree that groups one and two
"naturally" overlap.

Force that overlap, or try to eliminate the non-overlapping community members
and the project dies.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Linus on Ballmer and Gates
Authored by: billyskank on Wednesday, August 18 2004 @ 04:44 PM EDT
"[CEO Steve] Ballmer and [Chairman Bill] Gates have pride in the fact that their competition may have tried to crush them with legal wars, but they overcame. I think they would have a hard time using legal tactics. They would be ashamed."

It seems to me that there are two possibilities here: either Linus really thinks that, or he doesn't but he figures it costs him nothing to be gracious towards them anyway. Either way, I like his style.

---
It's not the software that's free; it's you.

[ Reply to This | # ]

T-shirts: go non-profit
Authored by: dlk on Wednesday, August 18 2004 @ 04:55 PM EDT
If Groklaw was setup as a non-profit, wouldn't it be able to use revenue from
selling t-shirts and other swag to defray expenses?

[ Reply to This | # ]

Linus created Linux
Authored by: tim_hunter on Wednesday, August 18 2004 @ 05:20 PM EDT
The writer of this article shows s/he has a clue in the
very first sentence: "Linus Torvalds created the first
iteration of the Linux operating system...".

Clearly the AdTI FUD didn't work on BusinessWeek.

[ Reply to This | # ]

The Groklaw approach
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 18 2004 @ 05:25 PM EDT
How about: "Open source is the Groklaw approach applied to software"

[ Reply to This | # ]

herding cats...
Authored by: free980211 on Wednesday, August 18 2004 @ 05:30 PM EDT
i think that was the funniest part.

it took me a minute to stop laughing long enough to explain to my wife that i
was reading another linus torvalds interview. one thing i love about the man, he
never fails to tickle my funny bone. of course, the kernel he
"shepherds" (along with the rest of the os - many, many thanks to all
the programmers out there) also brightens my day.

PJ, just out of curiousity, can groklaw be like "herding cats" as
well? if it is, you are doing a fine job. thank you.

have a nice day everyone!

[ Reply to This | # ]

Another great quote.
Authored by: jaydee on Wednesday, August 18 2004 @ 05:33 PM EDT
About managing an being a benevolent dictator.

"Having another person's trust is more powerful than all other management
techniques put together."

Discuss motivational techniques with reference to IBM and SCO.

---
Henry V: Act 4: Scene 3

[ Reply to This | # ]

Danger Will Robinson, Danger...
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 18 2004 @ 05:40 PM EDT
Linus - "Also it's good to copy good ideas. It should be encouraged."

How much you wanna bet this (taken out of context) quote shows up in one of the
next complaints filed by SCO?

[ Reply to This | # ]

Then Apply an Use a Real Open Source License Then
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 18 2004 @ 05:49 PM EDT
Groklaw started out as a community resource, but it has been hijacked along the
way. Why can't OSRM's business competitors use Groklaw and Grokline research for
commercial purposes? OSRM certainly proposes to use the material commercially.

'OSRM is working with the free and open source developer community through a new
project called Grokline to gather specifically focused non-patent prior art that
will help defend against any patent claims asserted against Linux. Grokline is
directed by Pamela Jones, Director of Litigation Risk Research for OSRM and
Editor and Moderator of Groklaw, the award winning website dedicated to
exhaustive and timely reporting on present and threatened litigation against the
Linux kernel and other free and open source software. Community resources like
Groklaw and Grokline are essential to the process of analyzing and rebutting
patent threats made against the Linux kernel or any other free and open source
software program. The community's efforts will be aided by OSRM's patent
counsel, who will help guide the fact-finding and analysis that is performed
there.

"My readers are participants, not just passively interested
observers," says Pamela Jones. "They have demonstrated their
willingness and skill in helping research copyright issues. Now, moving on to
patents, I believe they can help find prior art, if they receive some
specialized knowledge and training. They already have the technical knowledge to
understand patent descriptions. And they know how the Linux kernel works. Some
of them helped write it. All that is required is to teach them certain prior art
search skills and how to know what matters in a courtroom. We plan to do exactly
that, with attorneys creating free teaching tools, manuals and videos, to show
all who wish to help (OSRM?) how to find and contribute meaningful prior
art."

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCO copied >783,000 lines of IBM code
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 18 2004 @ 05:51 PM EDT
Without permission! LMAO!

http://www.utd.uscourts.gov/reports/ibm/00000233.pdf

(Taken from the Yahoo board)

Poor SCO...must be drowning in paperwork right now :-)

[ Reply to This | # ]

Linus got it right...
Authored by: Tomas on Wednesday, August 18 2004 @ 06:56 PM EDT
I merely wish to say the same thing I said in an email to you, PJ, back on March
5:

"Thanks for all the work you do with Groklaw, and thank you for
"inventing" Open Source Legal Research."

Thanks again,

---
Tom
Engineer (ret.)
We miss you, Moogy. Peace.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Linus on Patents, Innovation . . . and Groklaw
Authored by: Stumbles on Wednesday, August 18 2004 @ 07:24 PM EDT
I always enjoy reading what Linus has to say, this interview is not
different than the others. I most enjoyed his analogy of science vs.
witchcraft.

---
You can tuna piano but you can't tuna fish.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Ok, There are three separate balls in the air right now
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 18 2004 @ 09:00 PM EDT
There is the Technology Provider ball. Linus is a good example of one
in the Technology Provider ball, and SCOG is an example of how criminals
try to destroy the Technology ball for all of society for their miserable,
greedy, ignorant ends.

There is the Content Provider ball. The Recording and Broadcast Television
industries are two examples of the Content Provider ball. However, the
Internet industry is catching up quickly (e.g., Apple's iTunes).

There is the Bandwidth Provider ball. The Baby Bells, CLECs, MSOs, and
ISPs are examples of the Bandwidth Provider ball.

All these balls are interconnected. All the legacy corporations want to
limit or destroy the other balls in order to gain short term advantage.
The FCC and some government agencies are attempting to order the
inevitable changes transforming society. Jobs and Gates understand all
this and have the power to affect all this. Think but leave your fears and
biases behind you.

Think what opportunities will open as each ball evolves. This is the next
wave of social change. Reread those old books from the sixties and
seventies.

[ Reply to This | # ]

T-shirts
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, August 19 2004 @ 12:52 AM EDT

You can get Iron-on transfers that can be run through a laser printer.

Add a link and a directory for designs, and we can all produce them.


[ Reply to This | # ]

Linus on Patents, Innovation . . . and Groklaw
Authored by: proto on Thursday, August 19 2004 @ 06:54 AM EDT
You might think about the difference between no-profit and not-for-profit. Both
are non-commercial, but the second one works better. Even with T-shirts.

You might want to out-source the whole business though to some 3rd party.

[ Reply to This | # ]

groklaw T shirts
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, August 19 2004 @ 08:50 AM EDT
You could still host a high-res groklaw logo and say it is the 'authentic one',
people are free to download it and print it on shirts, and stuff.
Benefits: 1. free advertisement, 2. stay non-commerical, 3. the same logo will
spring up everywhere 4. people can sell it if they want

[ Reply to This | # ]

Linus on Patents, Innovation . . . and Groklaw
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, August 19 2004 @ 11:08 AM EDT
PJ,

Time to replace:
"When you want to know more but don't know where to look."

with:

"Groklaw is the open-source mentality applied to legal research" ~
Linus Torvalds

on all the headers.

Just a thought.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Linus on Patents, Innovation . . . and Groklaw
Authored by: jim Reiter on Thursday, August 19 2004 @ 08:36 PM EDT
copyright everything you publish, including programs; patent work when
appropriate, release under the GPL.

If you don't Microsoft will, they call it innovation, we call it theft.

Remember, Bill Gates never saw someone else's idea he didn't like (want).
Windows, netscape, Spreadsheets, Hypertext, word processors, etc, etc.
Microsoft's motto should be "not invented here".

[ Reply to This | # ]

Just another . . .
Authored by: a_dreamer on Thursday, August 19 2004 @ 10:13 PM EDT
. . . voice saying thanks for the miracle you've created.

The other Craig

[ Reply to This | # ]
Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details ) 		Site layout based on Woodlands theme by Bryan Bell.
Groklaw logo by John Crowley.
News Picks logo by Ted Thompson.
Powered By GeekLog
Created this page in 0.05 seconds