The Sopranos (new head of family Steve Balmer)

[str8line]

Being Canadian I only have a tacit amount of real world experience with American Law but from what I understand about the Rico Act it is directly related to the laundering of money gained by racketeering. Now don't get me wrong but if Steve Balmer was doing what it is doing to the Open Source Community with threats and intimidation....would that not constitute the creation of a new Cosa Nostra (maybe they should change the name of the company to MafiaSoft).

I did a bit of research into the RICO ACT, a piece of American legislation that was designed to bring down organized crime back specifically but not limited to the Italian Mafia. From the web site www.ricoact.com I found the following definition of racketeering:

The "racketeering activity" is the criminal activities in which the Mafia engages, e.g., extortion, bribery, loan sharking, murder, illegal drug sales, prostitution, etc.

Now don't get me wrong here, Microsoft and down right underhanded as they have become are not going out and raping a pillaging (unless you include the retarded price for their latest iteration of Windows) but extortion, loan sharking.....with what they did with SCO and what they are now doing applying pressure to Linux companies and to their customers would in my opinion fall into this category.

If there are any fresh faced Law School Grads out there looking to make a name for themselves, I say to you....have a stab at the Devil himself....he's fat, he's bald and he works in Redmond, WA.

Chris....with the Str8line
London, ON

[DeadSuperHero]

That's kind of a bold statement, dude. Sure, maybe what Microsoft is doing something bad. But on the other hand, maybe all these partnerships aren't really to threaten Linux with their own operating system, but instead to threaten competitors with their products.
I mean, OpenOffice is great. But it has a lot of problems with MS formatting sometimes. So, let's say MS comes in, and makes it more compatible? Let's say their focus is interoperability.
Is that really bad?
On the other hand, I hate Steve Balmer. He's a bad face for the company. And he looks kind of like Ted the Lawyer from Scrubs.

[jiminycricket]

That's kind of a bold statement, dude. Sure, maybe what Microsoft is doing something bad. But on the other hand, maybe all these partnerships aren't really to threaten Linux with their own operating system, but instead to threaten competitors with their products.
I mean, OpenOffice is great. But it has a lot of problems with MS formatting sometimes. So, let's say MS comes in, and makes it more compatible? Let's say their focus is interoperability.
Is that really bad?


All these 'interoperability' agreements have lead to MS extracting a patent license on each other's customers, to get around the GPL. OO.org is LGPL'd (section 11 deals with patents), so sure they can help out. Like everyone has helped out GPL'd products before, the normal way, adding code under the (L)GPL and granting a blanket patent license.

Mark Shuttleworth also called it racketeering. Funnily enough, SCOSource might end up with severe consequences for the perpetrators..maybe. Novell certainly hinted at it in a recent filing.


Linux vendor Novell recently signed a controversial deal with Microsoft. What is your take on it?

Microsoft is arguing that Linux violates its patents and that Novell is paying for the privilege of using that intellectual property, and it says that everybody else should as well. As soon as Microsoft said that, Novell said: “Hang on a minute, we never agreed to anything like that.” The two parties hadn’t even agreed on what they were agreeing on.

Microsoft is asking people to pay them for patents, but they won’t say which ones. If a guy walks into a shop and says: “It’s an unsafe neighbourhood, why don’t you pay me 20 bucks and I’ll make sure you’re okay,” that’s illegal. It’s racketeering. What Microsoft is doing with intellectual property is exactly the same. It’s a great company and I have great admiration for it, but this was not a well considered position.

[Hendrixski]

There have been legitimate yet over-aggressive companies who were tried under the RICO laws. I'm sure Microsofts Legal team has made sure that what they are doing is legal. I'm not arguing that it's moral or that they're doing it in the interest of interoperability, just that it's probably legal.

[str8line]

This is not about developing interoperability. That is part of the Smoke and Mirrors show that Microsoft is putting out there to make it seem ok to the general population.

I am all for the ability to use a Windows program on a Linux Desktop. I am all for groups working together for the common good of the general population. The fact that with another source of revenue for MS they can continue to reign supreme with their Office Productivity applications. My biggest problem with Steve Balmer and his F.U.D. spreading garbage is that he "claims" that there are patent infringements but never comes out and says what they are. Then he mildly threatens the customers of enterprise Linux providers that if they continue to use the software from said provider....they are in violation of a patent and could be sued...so the customer pressures the Linux provider for an explanation and then magically Microsoft is there with salvation for all that with the exchange of some money, MS will work with that company on interoperability.

Novell, Xandros and now Linspire are nothing but weak willed when they gave into Microsoft on its terms. Take out the patent protection clauses in these agreements and I don't think you would find very many nay sayers. But to sign an agreement with Microsoft under the pretense that there are IP Patent infringements is ludicrous.

Chris P....with the Str8line

[str8line]

Hendrixski,

The fact that Microsoft has always thumbed its nose in the face of legal action in no way would show any of us that they care if anything is legal. The company is still accumulating the huge fines from the EU every day after they lost their battle with the anti-competition bureau.

And let's not forget the fact that in the U.S. they lost in court and were at one time supposed to break up the company but when you have more money than brains....anything can be bought.

Chris P. with the Str8line

[Brunellus]

The text Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (18 U.S.C. §§ 1961-1968) can be found at:

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode18/usc_sec_18_00001961----000-.html

It's worth looking at the definitions of what constitutes "racketeering:



“racketeering activity” means
(A) any act or threat involving murder, kidnapping, gambling, arson, robbery, bribery, extortion, dealing in obscene matter, or dealing in a controlled substance or listed chemical . . . which is chargeable under State law and punishable by imprisonment for more than one year;


The only thing that's remotely close to Microsoft in that bit is "dealing in obscene matter," but I don't think that's going to be enough.

The Act goes on to list, in the next section, a further laundry list of things that constitute racketeering. I'm going to omit the more technical ones:

* bribery
* counterfeiting (that is, dealing in false currency)
* embezzlement from pension and welfare funds
* extortionate credit transactions(also known as loan-sharking. Note: "extortion" requires the threat of an act which itself would be illegal--murder, assault, and so forth)
* identity fraud
* Fraud relating to access devices
* Mail and wire fraud
* Financial Institution Fraud
* Unlawful procurement, reproduction, and/or sale of citizenship/naturalization papers
* Sale of obscene matter
* Obstruction of justice/criminal investigations
* Witness tampering
* Peonage, slavery, and trafficking in persons
* Money laundering

and on and on. I don't think you're going to get Microsoft on any of that.

[kamaboko]

My biggest problem with Steve Balmer and his F.U.D. spreading garbage is that he "claims" that there are patent infringements but never comes out and says what they are. Then he mildly threatens the customers of enterprise Linux providers that if they continue to use the software from said provider....they are in violation of a patent and could be sued...so the customer pressures the Linux provider for an explanation and then magically Microsoft is there with salvation for all that with the exchange of some money, MS will work with that company on interoperability.

Novell, Xandros and now Linspire are nothing but weak willed when they gave into Microsoft on its terms. Take out the patent protection clauses in these agreements and I don't think you would find very many nay sayers. But to sign an agreement with Microsoft under the pretense that there are IP Patent infringements is ludicrous.

Chris P....with the Str8line

First of all, making a claim and proving it are two different things. So until MS can do so, status quo is the word. I don't understand why you and so many people are getting bent out of shape over a claim. Second, I would argue there's a lot of stuff going on behind doors with Novell, Xandros, and Linspire that you and others know absolutely nothing about. You're as bad as MS making a claim you have failed to prove. All you have is conjecture and that is not proof enough. Are you in direct consultation with MS, Novell, Xandros, and Linspire lawyers?

[Hendrixski]

Hendrixski,

The fact that Microsoft has always thumbed its nose in the face of legal action in no way would show any of us that they care if anything is legal. The company is still accumulating the huge fines from the EU every day after they lost their battle with the anti-competition bureau.

And let's not forget the fact that in the U.S. they lost in court and were at one time supposed to break up the company but when you have more money than brains....anything can be bought.

Chris P. with the Str8line

It's all calculated. Their legal deparment knows what they can or can't be tried for. A few million euros is a small price to pay for the amount of business they procured by having anti-competative practices in the first place. They have to be smart enough to know that being caught on a RICO law would equal being shut down and going to jail, but some little anti-monopoly law... whatever. pay the fine... it's an investment with a really good ROI.

You said that in the US you can buy your way through the legal system... I would like to amend your statement that in EVERY COUNTRY IN THE WORLD you can buy your way through a legal system. Tell me that Chirac didn't buy his way out of jailtime for the blatant abuse of the system when he was mayor. I mean the guy had his house landscaped with the cities money, but went on to become president. Whatever, corruption is inately human, and NOT uniquely american.

BTW... Jimenycricket... That link you have to the video about the .debs is fantastic. I've read some documentaiton and seen a brief presentation before... but this one helps me fill in a few gaps! good one! thanks :-)

[str8line]

Yes this entire thread is a flame against companies and their products that I really believed in. With regards to Linspire's recent joining the Microsoft F.U.D. bandwagon I am shocked and amazed at the audacity of Kevin Carmony. I have enjoyed Freespire for sometime now but because of this cowardly inclusion into the IP Patent war.....I really do not know if going forward I could ever install Freespire or purchase a Linspire box in the future.

For those posts that have come before about myself spreading F.U.D. without the facts I have been following this process quite closely over the past 8 months and it is because of the actions of Microsoft in the past that I am a fervent FOSS user and promoter.

The following is from Novell's own press release with regards to patent infringement:

The patent cooperation agreement enables Microsoft and Novell to give customers assurance of protection against patent infringement claims. It gives customers confidence that the technologies they use and deploy in their environments are compliant with the two companies’ patents.

Here is some interesting information taken from www.groklaw.net about the Novell-Microsoft Deal with regards to patent infringement:

I can confirm that SUSE Linux is unique in Linux distros in one respect -- it's the only one the FOSS community has now utterly repudiated, and that won't change unless Novell hits reverse. If you think that won't impact SUSE quality as we go forward, you probably are new to these parts. (You might find this thread of interest.) No, only Wayback will show you what Novell used to know:

Recently Microsoft has been challenging the suitability of Linux for the enterprise, bending the truth quite a bit to make it fit their view of the world. This site is dedicated to unbending the truth and setting the record straight. Take the time to explore the facts, and you'll understand why Microsoft is challenging Linux, and why Linux is often a better choice than Windows for satisfying the business needs of enterprises.

They even had a page to answer Microsoft's patent threats:

CLAIM: Customers who deploy Linux are at risk for patent violation and copyright issues.

FACTS:

* Novell has no intention of asserting its patent portfolio against the Linux kernel or other open source programs included in Novell offerings.

* Novell will use its patent portfolio to protect open source products against potential third-party patent challenges, meaning that Novell is prepared to asserts its patents against such third parties. Novell is continuing to actively grow its patent portfolio, which currently corresponds to Novell's pioneering products in areas such as networking, directories, resource management, and identity management.

* Get more information on Novell and patents.

* Novell believes that customers and the marketplace are best served when technology investment decisions are driven by vendor innovation and competition. As with all purchasing considerations, customers should keep software patents in perspective. In reality, open source software poses no greater risk of patent infringement than does closed source software. And, while some software vendors may attempt to counter the competitive threat to Linux by making arguments about patent risks, they would assert patents against customers at their own peril. They would also do so against competitors (such as Novell) at the certainty of provoking a response. We urge customers to remind vendors that all are best served by using innovation and competition to drive purchasing decisions.

* Intellectual property rights systems vary throughout the world, and where patent protection is available for software, Novell has and will continue to use patents as a legitimate means of protecting software offerings. We believe that the current system in the European Union has served the industry, the individual member states and Novell well, and that it generally promotes innovation and competition in the industry. Accordingly, Novell does not see the need for the proposed changes to the current system.

* In the event the European Union were to allow broader patentability of software, Novell would nonetheless be able to freely market its software offerings, whether closed or open source, in Europe and other jurisdictions that presently favor software patents.

* To highlight how difficult patent protection can be, the United States Patent and Trademark Office recently rejected all of the claims of Microsoft's patent on the FAT file system, which Microsoft describes as "the ubiquitous format used for interchange of media between computers, and, since the advent of inexpensive, removable flash memory, also between digital devices."

* Novell has previously offered customers protection against similar threats to open source software by using its unique contractual and intellectual property rights from its position in the historical ownership chain of UNIX and UnixWare.

* Novell offers an indemnification program for copyright infringement claims made by third parties against registered Novell customers who obtain SUSE Linux Enterprise Server 8 (or later) and who after January 12, 2004, obtain upgrade protection and a qualifying technical support contract from Novell or a participating Novell or SUSE LINUX channel partner.

* Novell holds unique contractual and intellectual property rights because of its position in the historical ownership chain of UNIX and UnixWare. These rights include:

* The rights to license UNIX technology pursuant to a Technology License Agreement between SCO and Novell, including the right to authorize Novell customers to use that UNIX technology in their internal business operations

* The rights to take action on behalf of SCO under legacy UNIX SVRX licenses pursuant to the Asset Purchase Agreement between SCO and Novell

* As Novell previously confirmed, copyright registrations on UNIX SVRX releases, consistent with its position that it retained ownership of these copyrights.

Chris P....with the Str8line

[diskotek]

what happened to James Gandolfini :D

[CaptainTux]

what happened to James Gandolfini :D

Who? ;)