Landmark legal decision in favour of FOSS:

[handy]

This is HUGE!!!


News just broke jointly from the US Department of Justice and the German Federal Cartel Office that they have directed CPTN to change the way they acquire Novell's software patents so that the open source community is protected.

This is landmark news for the software freedom community. The Open Source Initiative (where I am a director) and the Free Software Foundation both submitted opinions to the DoJ. Both agreed that the acquisition of Novell's patent portfolio by a consortium comprising Apple, EMC, Microsoft and Oracle presented a threat to the ability of open source software to promote strong competitive markets. It seems the DoJ and FCO agreed with them.

Another excerpt:


I assume eventually Novell will have to post more details with the SEC, and then we can find out. But it's clear enough that if anyone thought they were going to get to sue Linux and FOSS with these patents, it isn't going to fly. Wow.

A huge thank you to OSI and FSF and FSFE for bringing this to the attention of both regulatory bodies. I gather that the purpose is to maintain the same level of protection that Linux patents had under Novell's OIN pledge. Wow. Thank you to both regulatory bodies. The FOSS world is deeply grateful.

& another:


So what does it all mean? Andrew “Andy” Updegrove, founding partner of Gesmer Updegrove, a top technology law firm, said, “This is a rather breath-taking announcement from a number of perspectives. Among others, the granularity of the restrictions imposed demonstrates a level of understanding of open source software in general, and Linux in particular, that has not been demonstrated by regulators in the past. It also demonstrates a very different attitude on the part of both the U.S. and German regulators, on the one hand, and Microsoft, on the other, from what we saw the last time that Microsoft was under the microscope. In the past, Microsoft was more disposed to fight than negotiate, and the U.S. and the European Commission were far apart in their attitudes. This announcement conclusively places open-source software on the U.S. regulatory map.”


More here:

http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20110420141724403

[sffvba[e0rt]

Lots of legal stuff that makes my head spin but the little that made sense sounded really good :)


404

[3Miro]

Yeah, I don't get the legal stuff, but I like the "subject to GPL" part. This morning is looking good so far.

[zekopeko]

Yeah, I don't get the legal stuff, but I like the "subject to GPL" part. This morning is looking good so far.

That part is actually the least clear.

[walt.smith1960]

Layman's take: Software patents are "deweaponized" to some extent? That would be useful to the world excluding CPTN and their ilk.

[lykwydchykyn]

Wow! I'm pretty stunned the US regulators would take that stance. Pleasantly stunned!

[gnomeuser]

Layman's take: Software patents are "deweaponized" to some extent? That would be useful to the world excluding CPTN and their ilk.

Not really. The specific patents involved with the sale of Novell are the only ones covered. Also while it says the patents are subject to the GPLv2, strangely there are still mentions of being able to collect royalties from them (though how that will work is a matter of further study).

The impact on software patents as a whole is likely minuscule though this is up to, likely several, lawyers to comment on.

[fuduntu]

Also while it says the patents are subject to the GPLv2, strangely there are still mentions of being able to collect royalties from them (though how that will work is a matter of further study).

It is indeed interesting that they may be able to collect royalties legally even while distributing the GPL2 code under the terms of the license.

I assume it would become a contract issue rather than a patent issue at that point but IANAL.

[zekopeko]

It is indeed interesting that they may be able to collect royalties legally even while distributing the GPL2 code under the terms of the license.

I assume it would become a contract issue rather than a patent issue at that point but IANAL.

Nothing was stopping patent owners from collecting royalties on GPL software before this. IIRC Red Hat was sued and settled twice over patent infringement accusations on some FOSS software (not sure if it was GPL but most likely it was).

The only exception would be if they distributed GPL software or contributed to it.

[sydbat]

Among others, the granularity of the restrictions imposed demonstrates a level of understanding of open source software in general, and Linux in particular, that has not been demonstrated by regulators in the past.No. This decision has nothing to do with that at all. It has everything to do with this:
Both agreed that the acquisition of Novell's patent portfolio by a consortium comprising Apple, EMC, Microsoft and Oracle presented a threat to the ability of open source software to promote strong competitive markets. It seems the DoJ and FCO agreed with them.This decision is about competition, NOT open source. If Apple, et al, were being more competitive with their US only software patents, then the decision would have gone the other way.