|
Jeremy Allison Has Resigned from Novell to Protest MS Patent Deal |
|
Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 08:35 AM EST
|
The legendary Jeremy Allison (of Samba fame) has resigned from Novell in protest over the Microsoft-Novell patent agreement, which he calls "a mistake" which will be "damaging to Novell's success in the future." His main issue with the deal, though, is "that even if it does not violate the letter of the licence, it violates the intent of the GPL licence the Samba code is released under, which is to treat all recipients of the code equally." He leaves the company at the end of this month. He explained why in a message sent to several Novell email lists, and the message included his letter to management: "Whilst the Microsoft patent agreement is in place there is *nothing* we can do to fix community relations. And I really mean nothing," Allison wrote. "Until the patent provision is revoked, we are pariahs....Unfortunately the time I am willing to wait for this agreement to be changed ...has passed, and so I must say goodbye."
Here is his statement in full. Update, 6:05 PM Eastern: ZDNET's Mary Jo Foley reports he has been snapped up by Google.
*********************
I have decided to leave Novell.
This has been a very difficult decision, but one I feel I have no choice but
to make.
As many of you will guess, this is due to the Microsoft/Novell patent
agreement, which I believe is a mistake and will be damaging to Novell's
success in the future. But my main issue with this deal is I believe that even
if it does not violate the letter of the licence it violates the intent of the
GPL licence the Samba code is released under, which is to treat all recipients
of the code equally.
In case anyone might think I gave up too easily, here is a copy of a letter I
recently sent to management on this matter.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I know you don't want to hear this, I know *nobody* wants to hear this but
I'll not be able to live with this if I don't say it publicly at least once.
Whilst the Microsoft patent agreement is in place there is *nothing* we can do
to fix community relations. And I really mean nothing.
We can pledge patents all we wish, we can talk to the press and "community
leaders", we can do all the right things w.r.t. all our other interactions,
but we will still be known as GPL violators and that's the end of it.
For people who will point out to me we don't "technically" violate the GPLv2
here's an argument I recently made on the mailing lists.
"Do you think that if we'd have found what we legally considered a clever way
around the Microsoft EULA so we didn't have to pay for Microsoft licenses and
had decided to ship, oh let's say, "Exchange Server" under this "legal hack"
that Microsoft would be silent about it - or we should act aggr[i]eved when they
change the EULA to stop us doing this?"
The Microsoft patent agreement has put us outside the community, and there is
no positive aspect to that fact, and no way to make it so. Until the patent
provision is revoked, we are pariahs.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unfortunately the time I am willing to wait for this agreement to be changed
to remedy the GPL violation has passed, and so I must say goodbye.
SuSE Linux is technically one of the most advanced Linux distributions, and I
am proud to have been a small part of the Team that helped create it. Working
at Novell has been a great deal of fun for me, and I will miss many of the
great people I have worked with here.
Jeremy Allison.
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 08:40 AM EST |
Perhaps the 1st of many ... [ Reply to This | # ]
|
- go figure and good for him!!! - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 08:46 AM EST
- Jeremy Allison Has Resigned from Novell to Protest MS Patent Deal - Authored by: bb5ch39t on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 09:17 AM EST
- Three Cheers for Jeremy Allison! - Authored by: NickFortune on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 09:42 AM EST
- Maybe before you leave they will wake up... if not then, Google, Ubuntu, others, etc? - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 10:02 AM EST
- Wow. What a wonderful person! - Authored by: TedSwart on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 12:01 PM EST
- Jeremy Allison Has Resigned from Novell to Protest MS Patent Deal - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 12:34 PM EST
- At Last.. - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 03:21 PM EST
- At Last.. - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 09:06 PM EST
- At Last.. - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, December 22 2006 @ 12:24 AM EST
- At Last.. - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, December 22 2006 @ 06:49 AM EST
- At Last.. - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, December 22 2006 @ 06:55 AM EST
- Jeremy Allison Has Resigned from Novell to Protest MS Patent Deal - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 03:35 PM EST
- Well Done Jeremy! - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 03:57 PM EST
- Jeremy Allison Has Resigned from Novell to Protest MS Patent Deal - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, December 22 2006 @ 09:36 AM EST
- Jeremy Allison Has Resigned from Novell to Protest MS Patent Deal - Authored by: Zero1 on Monday, December 25 2006 @ 10:15 AM EST
- Jeremy Allison Has Resigned from Novell to Protest MS Patent Deal - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, December 28 2006 @ 09:31 AM EST
|
Authored by: Pogue Mahone on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 08:44 AM EST |
Off topic stuff here please. With links, if you can.
---
--
I'm not afraid of receiving e-mail from strangers - see my bio. for addresses. I
*especially* like encrypted and signed messages :-)[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- From News Picks: "Well, Well, Look Who's Here" - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 09:04 AM EST
- From News Picks: "Well, Well, Look Who's Here" - Authored by: jsoulejr on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 09:48 AM EST
- From News Picks: "Well, Well, Look Who's Here" - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 09:54 AM EST
- From News Picks: "Well, Well, Look Who's Here" - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 10:22 AM EST
- I guess this means that even Microsoft agree that Linux is enterprise ready. (nt) - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 10:35 AM EST
- From News Picks: "Well, Well, Look Who's Here" - Authored by: PJ on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 11:06 AM EST
- I just don't get it - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 06:49 PM EST
- Non Sequitur - Authored by: Ed L. on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 10:01 AM EST
- From News Picks: "Novell CEO on the Microsoft deal" - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 01:41 PM EST
- What is going on in the IBM and Novell cases? - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 02:00 PM EST
- Instant Messaging Patents - Authored by: W^L+ on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 03:05 PM EST
- Prior Art? - Authored by: NetArch on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 05:14 PM EST
- Prior Art--1968? - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 05:42 PM EST
- New SCO motion - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 04:44 PM EST
- New SCO motion - Authored by: lordshipmayhem on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 05:11 PM EST
- New SCO motion - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 05:27 PM EST
- New SCO motion - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 05:56 PM EST
- My bad... - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, December 22 2006 @ 12:47 PM EST
- New SCO motion - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 07:37 PM EST
- SUSE co-founder returns to Novell - Authored by: SpaceLifeForm on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 05:48 PM EST
- UPDATE 1-Red Hat profit tops Wall Street view, shares up - Authored by: Jude on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 07:09 PM EST
- RSS - Microsoft seeks patent covering Web feed readers - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 08:02 PM EST
- Off Topic - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, December 22 2006 @ 03:25 AM EST
- Off Topic - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, December 22 2006 @ 10:51 AM EST
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 08:45 AM EST |
I laud people who put ethics above convenience, but I hope this does not cost
him too much in the short term.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- I hope the personal cost is not too high - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 08:51 AM EST
- His point is, regardless of personal cost, he must... - Authored by: PJ on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 08:52 AM EST
- His point is, regardless of personal cost, he must... - Authored by: clueless on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 09:19 AM EST
- His point is, regardless of personal cost, he must... - Authored by: hardcode57 on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 09:44 AM EST
- His point is, regardless of personal cost, he must... - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 10:17 AM EST
- His point is, regardless of personal cost, he must... - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 11:07 AM EST
- His point is, regardless of personal cost, he must... - Authored by: PJ on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 11:08 AM EST
- His point is, regardless of personal cost, he must... - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 11:22 AM EST
- No - Authored by: grundy on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 04:36 PM EST
- His point is, regardless of personal cost, he must... - Authored by: th80 on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 11:40 AM EST
- Actually I have. - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 12:40 PM EST
- hmm - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 02:00 PM EST
- hmm - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 03:17 PM EST
- His point is, regardless of personal cost, he must... - Authored by: MadTom1999 on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 02:14 PM EST
- Corollary of one of Newtons laws, to be sure. - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 10:51 PM EST
- His point is, regardless of personal cost, he must... - Authored by: turbopro on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 10:24 AM EST
- His point is, regardless of personal cost, he must... - Authored by: Sean DALY on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 10:25 AM EST
- I beg to differ. - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 12:42 PM EST
- with his credentials he will find quick employment - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 08:56 AM EST
- I hope the personal cost is not too high - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 09:55 AM EST
- I hope the personal cost is not too high - Authored by: maz2331 on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 12:15 PM EST
- People in Novell must be feeling like SCO engineers in 2003 - Authored by: jcasares on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 12:49 PM EST
- I hope the personal cost is not too high - Authored by: jlp on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 05:48 PM EST
- The cost to Novell will be much greater - which may or may not be a comfort - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 06:13 PM EST
- his biggest problem is going to be how to spend the extra money - Authored by: NickFortune on Friday, December 22 2006 @ 06:57 AM EST
- I hope the personal cost is not too high - Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, December 23 2006 @ 03:08 PM EST
|
Authored by: reddsman on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 08:45 AM EST |
Here's a man who is willing to stick to his convictions. He believes the deal
is wrong and staked his career on it. Kudos to Jeremy for having the guts to do
what he feels is right.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: spiff on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 08:51 AM EST |
I briefly met Jeremy Allison a couple of years ago at a Linux Expo in London,
and I listened to him on the GPL3 discussion panel at the London Linux Expo a
couple of months ago (just days before the Novell/MS pact was announced).
At that time, and again today, he strikes me as an extraordinarily talented,
smart and very principled person. He's made a clearly very difficult decision,
and has stuck to the principles he believes in.
I thank him for that, and I hope that others will make the similarly difficult
but necessary decisions.
spiffx[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 08:53 AM EST |
He makes a point about MS's EULA vs Novell's GPL violation that would be very
hard to argue against. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Stumbles on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 08:57 AM EST |
I applaud Mr. Allison for his decision and he is absolutely correct. His
analogy about legally circumventing the Microsoft EULA is dead on and
it is exactly what Novell has done with the GLPv2.
---
You can tuna piano but you can't tune a fish.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 09:01 AM EST |
I read this comment on OSNEWS and it spoke volumes to me and it really helped to
understand just how insidious this deal between Novell and Microsoft.
Sigh........
By segedunum on 2006-12-21 13:07:31 UTC
Given that Microsoft is taking market share and customers away from Novell, and
Novell's CEO has admitted it, can anyone give a good business reason as to why
Microsoft would want to sell Novell's own distribution? The answer is, there
isn't, apart from the ulterior motives already discussed. It should also be
noted that Novell is actually paying royalties to Microsoft for those SLES
licenses.
Hovsepian basically sold his company for a measly few hundred million, and
Microsoft moved a bit closer towards what they always wanted - a distinction
between the free distributions and open source community and a licensed version
of Linux blessed by them.
I'm also not getting this interoperability thing in any way shape or form;
probably because it doesn't exist. There was nothing in the current version of
SLE that was written in any way with the help of Microsoft, Microsoft is not
moving towards using ODF, Microsoft contributed no code towards Samba (and has
actively slapped down some Microsoft engineers who've tried to help in the past)
and has done nothing about virtualising Windows under Linux.
Hovsepian said in an interview that interoperability and virtualisation was a
problem, and they lost customers to Microsoft because of it (hey, Microsoft is
going to help Novell win customers back!), but I see nothing that Microsoft is
helping with. We, and Novell, have had the option of VMware for years, and Xen
will run Windows - it's just that it can't do it without the aid of some
hardware, which is coming along. Novell should just have done a deal with VMware
for the time being. Can anyone point to some projects Microsoft has started and
some code Microsoft has contributed to make this famed interoperability happen?
If not, then Novell got absolutely nothing out of this deal. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 09:03 AM EST |
Chris DiBona and Leo Laporte of FLOSS Weekly did an interview of Jeremy back in
October. The guy has a terrific sense of humor and made for an entertaining
show -- I listened to it twice on my commutes.
FLOSS Weekly Episode 14[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: DaveF on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 09:09 AM EST |
If any are required.
---
Imbibio, ergo sum[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: DaveJakeman on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 09:26 AM EST |
Look, Novell, look! Look what you've gone and done! You're back in the
spotlight again for all the wrong reasons!
---
I would rather stand corrected than sit confused.
---
Should one hear an accusation, try it on the accuser.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- Earth to Novell - Authored by: rsmith on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 11:34 AM EST
- Earth to Novell - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 12:42 PM EST
- Earth to Novell - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 01:53 PM EST
- Earth to Novell - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 02:07 PM EST
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 09:41 AM EST |
Bravo, Mr. Allison. Here's a guy who stands by his morals. We need more
people like him. Novell needs to get rid of all of the Microsoft apologists --
including and especially those twits from Ximian. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 09:42 AM EST |
After reading the limitations placed on developers who
code for Novell, does
he really have a choice if he wishes
his code to continue to be under the
GPL?
He's made some very good points with regards to the
license,
Novell's breach and the analogy with regards to
MS EULA. I'd be interested in
finding out his take on the
limitations that are being placed on any developer
who
agrees to code for Novell.
RAS[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 09:44 AM EST |
... you must "treat all recipients of the code equally".
For example it
specifically says "if you
distribute copies of such a program, whether gratis or for a fee" ... "and
you
may at your option offer warranty protection in exchange for a fee". So you can
charge different recipients different prices.
Also you could be rude to
some recipients and polite to others. You don't need to provide documentation in
all their native languages. Etc.
Jeremy Allison is basically right
about the patent issue, but there's no reason to believe that "the intent of the
GPL licence the Samba code is released under ... is to treat all recipients of
the code equally". It's about freedom, not equality, and these are never the
same - giafly.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- Yes it does! - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 10:09 AM EST
- Yes it does! - Authored by: raya on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 11:17 AM EST
- Sorry - Authored by: LPrecure on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 08:11 PM EST
- Sorry - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 09:33 PM EST
- Sorry - Authored by: Andrew BC on Friday, December 22 2006 @ 01:05 AM EST
- Sorry - Authored by: RTH on Friday, December 22 2006 @ 01:15 AM EST
- Sorry - Authored by: raya on Friday, December 22 2006 @ 04:34 AM EST
- Sorry - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, December 22 2006 @ 05:53 AM EST
- Sorry - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 09:45 PM EST
- The *freedom* should be equal - Authored by: jbb on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 11:03 AM EST
- The GPL doesn't say that - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 11:25 AM EST
- see the GPL - Authored by: grouch on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 11:58 AM EST
- It is implied - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 01:37 PM EST
- It is implied - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, December 22 2006 @ 06:23 PM EST
- I think that you are mistaken - Authored by: TomWiles on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 04:32 PM EST
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 09:49 AM EST |
Usually if you working on a project and your employer make a decision you can't
reconsile your self with and you resign, you have to leave behind any cool stuff
you wrote.
Since Samba is GPL there is no question that he can take it with him.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 09:51 AM EST |
I hope we can get Nat and Miguel back from the dark side too.
Hope it's not too late.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 10:08 AM EST |
It's good when those who can afford to stand up in such a way do. Not many
people do.
Then again, not many can afford to.
Not everyone doesn't have to work for a living and can promote free and open
source software, and the wonderful religion that is has become.
I'm surprised this guy isn't being labeled a capitalist pig sellout for having
getting paid in the first place. Funny how that works.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: daWabbit on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 10:18 AM EST |
I feel bad that any person should have to suffer for the actions of [what once
was] a firm forming a part of the FOSS community. I can only hope that Mr.
Allison does not have to suffer overly for his principled stand.
Jack
---
"There ain't no reason I should work this hard when I can live off the chickens
in my neighbor's yard" -Bruno Wolfe[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 10:33 AM EST |
I didn't think they should feel that bad. I mean, I am just not going to use
Novell's software. But other than that, I wasn't really going to look at them in
moral terms ....[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 10:50 AM EST |
You know, it's nice and fuzzy that JA sticks to his
"convictions"...but JA himself acknowledges that Novell is ok by the
letter of GPL v2. So where's the problem? He answers that question, saying
they are pariahs to the community. The reality is obvious - there is no
violation of the GPL, just bad PR caused by FUD over the deal. For that, PJ and
other notables in the community are to blame. I don't expect this message to
survive. But I ask PJ and all in the community to seriously consider the
possibility that Novell has not acted wrongly, but rather, that her/we in the
OSS community have self-destructed over this one and caused the ensuing
mess...and it need not have happened. Sometimes the best approach to dealing
with a move that you don't agree with (esp if it doesn't violate the letter of
the GPL) is to just let it be.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- Haha funny troll - Authored by: jbb on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 11:12 AM EST
- Don't post on Groklaw any more. Thanks. - Authored by: PJ on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 11:18 AM EST
- The reality IS obvious -- just not the one you had in mind. - Authored by: OmniGeek on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 11:20 AM EST
- PJ needs to take responsibility!! - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 12:08 PM EST
- PJ needs to take responsibility!! - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 01:11 PM EST
- PJ needs to take responsibility!! - Authored by: Jude on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 01:12 PM EST
- So, what you're saying is... - Authored by: NetArch on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 02:45 PM EST
- Clueless MS trolls needs to take responsibility!! - Authored by: joel on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 02:51 PM EST
- Clueless MS trolls needs to take responsibility!! - Authored by: joel on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 02:52 PM EST
- Hi Steve.... - Authored by: bigbert on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 05:12 PM EST
- PJ needs to take responsibility!! - Authored by: GLJason on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 06:09 PM EST
|
Authored by: lordshipmayhem on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 11:16 AM EST |
There are times when "doing the right thing" means doing something
that carries a cost - I expect it will not be all that great in this case,
considering the qualifications of the individual involved. I congratulate Mr.
Allison for taking what he judges to be the morally correct course of action,
and wish that more had the intestinal fortitude to do the same in similar
circumstances.
To business: Hire this man, he has a strong sense of morality and will do the
right thing for you as well as for your customers and suppliers.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: ExcludedMiddle on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 11:19 AM EST |
The MS Exchange example highlights something interesting about the GPL and
the nature of FLOSS software. We have no trouble imagining a company of whatever
size reacting if they found that their licensing or contracts were at all
disadvantageous to their goals (which is usually making money.) We have a harder
time imagining what will happen when the GPL is violated, because there's no
entity behind it. Remember, the FSF makes the license, but not the software.
It's the copyright holders that must act in a legal sense.
The fact
that Novell and other pundits cry foul when the licensing changes to protect the
interests of the copyright holders should be surprising. A company would
act the same way. The difference is that companies normally just trade in money.
If you want a proprietary company to change their licensing agreement with you
so that you can bundle their software with your own to sell it, if you give them
enough money and negotiate the specifics, it's very likely they'll agree. But
what people who contribute to FLOSS want is not really money, but the freedom
aspect to be unchanged. And since this is the very thing that Novell and other
companies want, there's no deal that can be made.
What surprises me is
how business keeps forgetting the fairy tale of the golden goose. The goose was
killed to try to get all of the eggs at once, and it was found to be empty. It
wasn't the goose that people wanted, it was the eggs. So why do companies make
the same mistake, over and over again? How do they forget how this software
became so powerful and useful in the first place? How it continues to grow and
evolve, at an astounding pace? It's the libre part of the license that make this
possible; it's a world of programmers adding to it, probably on a 24/7 basis
worldwide, because they want it shared and free. If you remove that, you've
killed the goose. And all you get is a nice goose dinner for that one evening,
and no more eggs afterwards.
I hope that Novell enjoys their roasted
goose banquet right now. My advice to them is to save the leftovers, because
that's all they're going to be eating going forward.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 11:42 AM EST |
In the event that he is pointed here and reads this, I would just like to extend
my best wishes to him in his future endeavors. If nothing else, he has proven
to be an upstanding member of the community.
As for Novell, I still wonder if this whole thing wasn't Microsoft's idea to do,
well, exactly what it is doing--divide the community? It would certainly
explain a few things... Not that it excuses it, but I wonder...
Whatever else, Microsoft has proven adept at killing its competitors time and
again, via means legal and illegal alike. I have sincere doubts that it has
ever or will ever stop the practice of killing them off. I even remember
objecting to one of the anti-trust settlements I ended up being a party to due
to an old copy of Windows 98 in that the settlement did *NOTHING* to halt the
injury. There wasn't even a vague promise of changed behavior in the future...
it was as if they'd bought a license to monopolize things for the last six or so
years with the implication that we could have exactly the same settlement in
another six with absolutely nothing changing.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: MrCharon on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 12:00 PM EST |
How did Novell feel when Microsoft found a loop-hole with the Netware license,
that allowed the Netware Gateway Service to be used to bypass having to buying
User-Licenses for each user.
See Benefits of Using GSNW (Microsoft
TechNet)
--- MrCharon
~~~~
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 12:02 PM EST |
""Do you think that if we'd have found what we legally considered a
clever way around the Microsoft EULA so we didn't have to pay for Microsoft
licenses and had decided to ship, oh let's say, "Exchange Server"
under this "legal hack" that Microsoft would be silent about it - or
we should act aggr[i]eved when they change the EULA to stop us doing
this?""
well said - this really nails the point.
I guess everything is okay as long as you are trying to improve you stock and
please the board of directors.
these companies have to learn that FOSS has it owns board of directors and that
is the community. and the gpl is our EULA. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 12:26 PM EST |
Many people applaud Jeremy Allison's resignation from Novell. Regretably I
don't. I don't see that a consciencious like Jeremy had any choice. And that
is why I am not applauding, because he had no choice. It should never have come
to this point.
Since I am recently out of work too, I can sympathize with Jeremy. Undoubtedly
since his talent is so much greater than mine, hopefully he will land someplace
much more in agreement with his principles.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: mm on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 12:36 PM EST |
Hmm, so he's leaving because of the -perception- that Novell has violated
the GPL. Good job to Groklaw and everyone else who has no clue what the real
agreement was about, and who instead just assume the worst becase it involves
Microsoft. Granted, if Allison doesn't even know the full details, then he
shouldn't jump ship quite yet either, particularly given Novell's
past.
We so easily forget (or ignore) the possibility that Novell
could have discovered something that would take years upon years to litigate to
receive damages, in the end receiving less in damages, factoring in costs of
litigation, than they can get right now with a quiet agreement with Microsoft.
Novell probably isn't allowed to tell even their full staff about it, much less
the public. What ever happened to "innocent until proven guilty"?
I
have read something before that said if you have a grievance with someone, you
approach them first to try to resolve it. If that fails, you come back with a
friend. If all else fails, you make your claims public.
For all we
know, Novell could have Microsoft by the jewels because of some Novell patent
that -Microsoft- is violating, and Microsoft might expect it to take five years
to get the offending methods of concepts out of their products. Do you think
Microsoft would agree to keep this out of the courts if it were made public?
Think about all of the other private settlements following lawsuits, and how
they will never see the light of day.
What I'm stressing is that WE
DO NOT KNOW what the full agreement is about, so we shouldn't make
assumptions, particularly if we are very high-profile individuals or
organizations.
"Do you think that if we'd have found what we
legally considered a clever way around the Microsoft EULA so we didn't have to
pay for Microsoft licenses and had decided to ship, oh let's say, "Exchange
Server" under this "legal hack" that Microsoft would be silent about it - or we
should act aggr[i]eved when they change the EULA to stop us doing
this?"
Microsoft would not be silent, but they could not do
anything about it. Microsoft can yell at me all they want, but if I have not
done anything wrong, they can take a hike. It would come to a point of "put up
or shut up". If I really enjoyed distributing/selling Exchange under such a
situation and if my customers were satisfied or even happy, then I should be
upset after Microsoft changed their license to prevent such a thing. I would be
losing a part of my business revenue, and my customers would be losing a product
or service that they found beneficial.
But again, we don't know if
that's the same situation we are now facing with Novell and
Microsoft.
Note that because some people whine about Anonymous posts,
I have created an account (which I -very- rarely ever do anywhere, nor do I
normally accept cookies) so that PJ can have the option to contact me directly,
if she so wishes. I will probably not log in again, but my posts can be
recognized by my writing style, my IP addresses (home and work) and my
sig.
-M
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- Jeremy Allison Has Resigned from Novell to Protest MS Patent Deal - Authored by: gjleger on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 01:00 PM EST
- Sorry mm but what you say makes no sense. - Authored by: TedSwart on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 01:14 PM EST
- Agreement was not published - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 01:19 PM EST
- Jeremy Allison Has Resigned from Novell to Protest MS Patent Deal - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 01:41 PM EST
- Good for you, MM. - Authored by: Ian Al on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 01:57 PM EST
- Jeremy Allison Has Resigned from Novell to Protest MS Patent Deal - Authored by: zcat on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 02:49 PM EST
- And you have seen the agreement? - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 05:29 PM EST
- Jeremy Allison Has Resigned from Novell to Protest MS Patent Deal - Authored by: Kaemaril on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 06:11 PM EST
- Secrecy has a cost - don't whine about it - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 06:19 PM EST
- What do Microsoft and Novell think? - Authored by: GLJason on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 06:37 PM EST
- I need to see the MS-Novell in full before I can do business with Novell. - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, December 22 2006 @ 05:31 AM EST
- Jeremy Allison Has Resigned from Novell to Protest MS Patent Deal - Authored by: PJ on Friday, December 22 2006 @ 06:28 AM EST
|
Authored by: dnhuff on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 12:36 PM EST |
There is a larger issues which our society has yet to address, we can see it
both in software and religion.
If you can't license your own software with restriction to keep all the rights,
how can you make a living?
The same question in religion is, If God's manifestation for today has re-newed
religion and abolished the clergy, how will those in the clergy make a living if
they were to accept the new revelation?
Just how would Microsoft be able to continue employing good, creative people if
they did not own the fruits of their labors?
The answer is similar to the answer in the abortion discussion -- don't ever get
in the situation where this becomes a question.
In a very real sense: Don't expect to make a living from creating software (for
its own sake.) People and companies that do useful things create software as a
by-product, they make their living from the things they do, not the software
they create. Those (relatively) few, true software artists, may get by, as
artists have always done, but that life will never satisfy the business person.
Microsoft and others have a real challenge, how to do something useful beyond
creating software, so that they can make their living from that and not the
software.
Just the same as preachers now have a great challenge, how to lead people to God
(and make a living) when He has abolished their profession.
---
'O Son of Spirit! The best beloved of all things in My sight is Justice;' --
Baha'u'llah[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: gfolkert on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 01:22 PM EST |
Those in Novell proper, Ximian, SUSE and others.
There have a been a few
so far that have left, but Jeremy Allison is the biggest fish so far. There are
a few that have significant impact on the Linux Kernel, many on Gnome,
Evolution, Mono...
In fact, the tendrils affect nearly every Linux
distribution and many core packages, at this point.
The fallout has of
yet to really begin, this is just the pre-cursor.
I commend Jeremy for
doing what he thinks is right. Though, I think Novell has really gotten the
beast into an agreement to which it doesn't realize it cannot pull back from
without HUGE HUGE costs (in legal and other fundamentals).
Microsoft in
short will be driving MANY computer buyers and users to Linux, mainly due to the
Vista effect.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 01:28 PM EST |
SMB originated at IBM and IBM has a lot of good lawyers should Microsoft decide
to start some legal fight. That would be great day for Groklaw and popcorn
companies! :)[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 02:05 PM EST |
You seem to be saying that you have no moral or ethical responisbility to
understand the intent of a law or license and abide by that. All that is
necessary is that you don't break the letter of the law.
I don't agree with you. I believe we are charged with the moral and ethical
responisbility to live by the plain clear intention of the law.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 02:06 PM EST |
quote from a Linux forum:
"it's a bit similar to what Pamela Jones did when she was criticized about
taking a job working to offer IP protection (or something like that). Key people
in the FLOSS community showing that its values are really important to them,
that's pretty inspiring."[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 02:15 PM EST |
Twenty eight years ago the Supreme Court gave a recipe for the elimination of
software related utility patents –- go to Congress:
“The mathematical formula involved here has no substantial practical application
except in connection with a digital computer. It may be that the patent laws
should be extended to cover these programs, a policy matter to which we are not
competent to speak. . . If these programs are to be patentable, considerable
problems are raised which only committees of Congress can manage, for broad
powers of investigation are needed, including hearings which canvass the wide
variety of views which those operating in this field entertain. The
technological problems tendered in the many briefs before us indicate to us that
considered action by the Congress is needed.”, Parker v. Flook, 437 U.S. 584
(1978).
An organized campaign by the tens of thousands of open source community members
to influence representatives in Congress to restrict the scope of 35 U.S.C. Sec.
101 is the only hope to eliminate the evils of software related utility patents.
Pursuing relief through a copyright license will *never* work -- that is an
illusory legal dream.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- The problem is... - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 06:16 PM EST
- Already solved - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 07:17 PM EST
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 02:45 PM EST |
Thanks Jeremy !
- from an anonymous admirer, only one of many.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 03:43 PM EST |
It's inspiring to see a brave man take a stand for what he believes in.
Hopefully his stand will stiffen the spines of those around him and Novell will
be coerced into doing the right thing.
-JK[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 04:45 PM EST |
restated, if you're not willing do "die" for anything, then what are
you living for?
It's almost funny, but when you think about it, the people in the past have been
much smarter than the so-called "programmers, chemists, engineers, poets,
novelists".. and I can go on and on...
think about it, the people who are afforded "smart" status today
couldn't hold a candle to the scientists and other intellectuals of even 50
years ago. In other words, do you think that just because you created a
computer game on a chip that you're "smart"???
that is too funny for even a comeback.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 04:50 PM EST |
Jeremy starts with Google in the new year according to an interview with Mary
Jo Foley!
J
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 05:45 PM EST |
If the deal infringes on Jeremy's sense of honor then thats good enough for me,
I don't need to see the "confidential" contract.
It's refreshing to see morals and self worth overcome the money of power.
The future is empowering customers not suing them. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 05:46 PM EST |
http://www.heise.de/english/newsticker/news/82876 [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 05:57 PM EST |
Bravo, sir. Top man. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Archipel on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 06:25 PM EST |
I don't understand why this whole agreement thing is so bad for the linux
community? It seems indeed like everyone is against this whole thing. I am very
much afraid that both Samba and GPLv3 will hurt Novell and thereby Suse Linux,
but that's because of the bad PR.
Isn't it great that even Microsoft finally admits that linux is becoming
dangerous for it? They finally realize that even they, with all their money,
can't stand up against a community of thousands or even millions of programmers.
All they can do to survive is provide interoperability, but that's also the
thing linux needs.
I hate having to emulate a whole PC in VMware just to run some tiny little
application for Windows on my PC, and I'm not the only one. If this deal is
going to solve that problem, I honestly can't see anything wrong for the linux
community.
I also disagree with the fact that the Novell-Microsoft agreement is violating
the idea behind the GPL. The GPL is about giving everyone the possibility to
alter software and to distribute it under the same terms. And yes, there is a
part of it concerning patents, but Novell is not breaking it. Not even it's
idea.
There was no agreement between Microsoft and Novell about not sueing each other.
Microsoft promised to to sue Novell's customers for patent infrigement. That
doesn't mean Microsoft can't sue Novell for doing so. And look at the irony of
this, how could Microsoft sue Novell's customers for something Novell could
never implement in it's software? That would only be possible if Novell had maid
some mistake nobody noticed, but even then and without the agreement, I don't
think Microsoft would sue Novell's customers but Novell itself. This fud is just
about an extra guarantee granted to Novell's customers, not about a significant
fact. Red Hat and other OSS companies might not have this guarantee, but that
doesn't mean their customers have or Red Hat itself has to be afraid of being
sued from Microsoft. Red Hat has just the same rights as Novell, neither can
break any of MS's patents.
All this agreement brings to linux is goodness, except for all this FUD of
course. Look at all the improvements that can be made now. Wine can become even
better, the same counts for mono and OpenOffice.org. Samba too would benefit
alot, if they weren't so much against this agreement. And all of Microsoft's and
Novell's interoperability changes. Novell's changes would be licensed under the
GPL, so again, what's the problem?
I must say I'm very disappointed in this community. I do have respect for your
views, but please don't think your opinion is the only right one. I'm not saying
mine is, but please wait a while before you condemn Novell. It takes time before
these agreement can have effects, so please wait and see. The agreement has only
been made about one month ago.
What concerns Jeremy Allison, I'm very sorry to hear that he's leaving Novell,
but if he believes he's doing the right thing, then he should be doing it. This
does not mean I agree with him about the whole agreement, but it means that I do
agree that you can't work against your principles.
Oh, and for those that wanted to ask, I don't work for Novell or Microsoft.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 07:15 PM EST |
What Mr. Allison did makes perfect sense. It's nice that he's found employment
elsewhere right away. He was obviously concerned, and rightly so, that the
agreement between Microsoft and Novell was holding not just him, but Novell and
SuSE, back. Which it will. Affecting Mr. Allison, as well as Novell in a way
where there will be less community involvement, less momentum, and so forth.
Novell will be less "involved" in many of the ways that matter. There
is no doubt about this.
On the other hand, the agreement is clearly not in violation of the letter of
the GPLv2, and depending on what happens with GPLv3, the smartest move may be to
prevent Microsoft from distributing coupons - in other words - Microsoft should
be encouraged to extend patent pledges of one form or another as an olive
branch. Using gplv3 as a weapon against Novell specifically is going to make it
harder for the license to gain the required traction. (just my opinion, folks).
Classifying Microsoft as a redistributor would probably be a very effective way
of dealing with things, then they would be encouraged to extend patent promises.
I totally understand where Jeremy is coming from, and I appreciate what he's
saying, but ultimately what needs to happen is for Microsoft to join the ranks
of IBM, Novell, Red Hat, and any other corporation that has decided to extend
patent pledges of some sort or another towards GPL-licensed material. Obviously,
Microsoft has major concerns about this, but they need to get over it and get
with the program. Dream on, right? Yeah, probably.
But in any case, one can see clearly what MS and Novell were doing, and one can
also see clearly what Jeremy, and the Samba team, and Mr. Shuttleworth, and so
many other folks are doing.
It's almost like a fork. Xemacs vs emacs all over again, sort of. Except this
time it's more like gplv2 vs gplv3 (but not really). On the one hand, gplv3 IS
gpl every bit as much as gplv2 -- it just CLARIFIES and EXPLAINS gplv2. It's not
a different license. Well, OK, it's a "different" license, but it's
not really anything more than a clarification of the concepts and principles
embodied in gplv2.
It's wierd - because when I first heard of this collaboration between SuSE and
Microsoft, I was excited, because I thought that people would be more willing to
accept Linux. And to that end, there's probably still a lot of folks who feel
that way, and feel that it's a good thing. Let's face it - there's only ONE
Microsoft. Microsoft IS an instance. The only instance of itself you'll ever
find. It's more efficient to realize that and not be afraid of 10,000
Microsofts, because there is only one.
On the other hand... the point of view being presented by many seriously devoted
members of the "community" makes perfect sense as well. At best, the
patent protections are completely unnecessary. Any code coming from Novell might
be suspect. There's no reason that Red Hat or anyone else should pay protection
money to anyone.
If I didn't know any better, I'd say that philosophically, ethically perhaps,
conceptually, in terms of licenses but not really licenses so much but the
concepts underlying the need for them in the first place perhaps, what we have
is a huge "fork" of sorts, a collosal shift, the evidence of which is
not manifested in any physical object such as a license. You could say it's v2
vs v3, but that's not it, really. If you try for a physical manifestation of
this metaphysical "fork" in the v2 vs v3 argument (which isn't really
an argument as I said before, just more of a clarification of v2), it won't
really work, because v3 just clarifies v2 anyway. It's not a "fork".
Not meant to be one, anyway. Most people in the "community" don't
believe v3 will cause a fork, anyway. V3 is just a clarification.
So that's the thing - you can choose. You have that choice. You can go with
Novell, or you can go with Red Hat. What we have is undeniably real, but yet
there are no real physical objects that serve as a manifestation of that shift.
Perhaps other than blogs, comments, mailing list posts, and so forth.
Here we have one time in history where we can make our voice heard, where people
are genuinely interested in what other people have to say. Taken together, all
the posts, all the blogs, all the comments - this is the evidence - these are
the physical manifestations of what has become a giant, strange, metaphysical
"fork" of sorts. You won't see it if you don't have an open mind. But
it's there, if you look. And the choice is yours.
Strange, huh?
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: PolR on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 10:08 PM EST |
Anyone knows why Google might need a top level Samba hacker? I can't think of a
reason but I bet they are *not* looking for a high caliber sysadmin.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- Google? - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, December 22 2006 @ 04:45 AM EST
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 11:19 PM EST |
Every one at Novell should also quit. What a sell out to Microsoft. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, December 21 2006 @ 11:35 PM EST |
In other news this week, Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols reports that SUSE
co-founder Hubert Mantel has returned to Novell after a year
away.
SUSE co-founder Hubert Mantel is back in the saddle at
Novell. Back in November of 2005 when the well-respected chief maintainer of the
SUSE Linux kernel left Novell, he said in an email announcing his resignation
that "This is no longer the company I founded 13 years
ago."
In the DMO interview, Mantel explained that
he had come back because, "I had more than one year of time to think about my
future and came to the conclusion that the thing I'm most interested in still is
Linux. Also I do have many good friends at SuSE and I really like to work with
and for Linux."
When asked in an interview with DMO about
the Novell deal with Microsoft, he had this to say:
6. What
do you think about the Microsoft/Novell deal?
I think it is a good thing
especially for the users. If you think some years back, Linux was not taken
seriously. Now even Microsoft acknowledges that it exists and will not go away.
I understand that many people don't like it as Novell is collaborating with the
"evil empire". But I don't like this way of thinking; we are not working against
somebody, but we are working FOR Linux. Fundamentalism always leads to pain.
What's important is that Linux is free and will remain to be free. The source
code is open to everybody, this is what counts for me. Some people seem to be
torn in an interesting way: On one hand they want "world domination", at the
same time they don't like the feeling that Linux has grown up and needs to deal
with the real business world out there. We have a saying here in Germany that
goes along the lines of "wash me, but do not make me wet". If you want Linux to
succeed, you cannot live in your own separate universe.
He
also had this response to a question about his thoughts on the future of
open-source software:
9. In your opinion, what will be
open-source's future?
Linux and open source have grown up, it has
entered mainstream. I think that open source and proprietary software will
co-exist. While I prefer open source, I do understand that there also exists
software where the source code is not freely available. And this kind of
software always will exist. For me it is important to be able to choose.
Competition is always good. Noone knows how the world would look like if Linux
and open source would not exist. I think it already changed the IT world in a
big way.
--bystander1313 [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, December 22 2006 @ 11:12 AM EST |
While I respect Allisons decision I know one thing this will make me think long
and hard about. Whether or not to hire Open Source software contributors and
developers. if they cant seperate religon and politics from business affairs,
do I really want them working for me? The answer sadly is no.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: bigbert on Friday, December 22 2006 @ 07:12 PM EST |
"Notwithstanding any of the above, if you break the spirit of the GPL even
though you are technically within the letter, then this license is revoked and
copyright applies. You may NOT impose restrictions on people you distribute this
software to, so DO NOT GET CUTE!"
---
LnxRlz![ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, December 24 2006 @ 03:57 AM EST |
Jeremy made the right decision. But, the discussion around the deal has been
mainly around whether or not it violates the letter or the spirit of the GPL. I
think, to some degree, this is a wrong focus. The real issue is that the deal is
damaging for the community, and we expected better from Novel.
The damage is this: Novel has accepted an incentive to infridge on MS pattents.
The more they do this, the more they will gain over their competitors. Not only
that, but they are going to actively work on "interoperation" with the
help of MS. It's like Novel is now including a bit of rat poison with each bit
of code they release, but only Novel's customers get the antidote.
This is the key issue and this is why opensource community has every right (and
indeed an obligation) to treat Novel as periah.
Nitecoder (can't log in for some reason)[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
|
|