SCO still hanging on

October 25, 2007 Leave a comment

After filing for Chapter 11, SCO may have found a buyer for its UNIX operations. From the article:

While still fighting in the courts and fresh from filing for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection last month, The SCO Group could soon be selling its steadily-declining Unix business.

In a filing in US Bankruptcy Court in Delaware, the Lindon, Utah-based company said it had received a “potential” $US36 million offer for its Unix business from JGD Management, an umbrella business of New York-based investment firm, York Capital Management. The filing has been posted on the Groklaw.com website, which has been tracking the legal records of the ongoing lawsuits between SCO, IBM, Novell and others. In it, SCO reports that the offer includes money for its Unix business, litigation claims and for litigation expenses.

The bid is subject to approval by the bankruptcy court, according to the filing, and competitive bids could still be accepted from other potential buyers.

SCO filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy reorganization last month as it began seeking ways to stay in business amid mounting expenses and several legal rulings that have hurt its legal fights with IBM and Novell.

If SCO gets out of the Unix business, it would continue solely as a mobile application platform vendor, which it has been working to become over the last several years.

York is a large hedge fund-like capital management company, so at first I didn’t think there was anything odd about this. It was probably an LBO in which the company thought it could squeeze some value out of a product that had been neglicted. Fairly popular stuff these days. But, it gets odd from here. As noted on Groklaw:

JGD Management Corporation has its principal executive offices at 1118 East Green Street Pasadena, California 91106 (http://www.secinfo.com/d12TC3.v51a.htm)

If you google the address the first match is a reference to a page on Edgar which provides the Form 4 (any of you US business types know what that is?) for a company known as Arrowhead Research Corp which has one R Bruce Stewart as its
CEO and Chairman of the Board.
(http://edgar.brand.edgar-online.com/EFX_dll/EDGARpro.dll?FetchFilingHTML1?SessionID=T-hII2bI2EHwHrP&ID=3669175)

R Bruce Stewart founded Acacia Research Corporation in March 1991.
(http://www.forbes.com/finance/mktguideapps/personinfo/FromPersonIdPersonTearsheet.jhtml?passedPersonId=927443).

Yes, that would be the same Acacia that is currently suing Red Hat and Novell. Quite some coincidence. I haven’t had a chance to personally verify all the information from the Groklaw post, but the links are all there for you to do so. If you’d like to do some additional research:

http://www.secinfo.com/d14D5a.u4d4r.htm
http://sec.edgar-online.com/2004/05/17/0001015402-04-002107/Section7.asp

–jeremy

Filed under Linux, Open Source, SCO

Sun Open Source "summit"

October 20, 2007 Leave a comment

Sun continues to be less schizo about Open Source and recently gathered media and employees at their main campus for an Open Source “summit” briefing.

Cited were improvements like a binary release of OpenSolaris and plans for dynamic scripting support in Sun’s Java Virtual Machine. Executives from throughout the company met with the media at Sun’s Santa Clara, Calif. headquarters campus for an open-source “summit” briefing.

“We have so many people who work on open source inside Sun,” that they must be brought together for an annual conference, said Simon Phipps, chief open-source officer at the company.

Project Indiana is something I find particularly interesting. Where Sun goes with it is something I’ll be watching closely. The implications of having two solid Open Source operating systems with real traction are significant. That’s not to say that the BSD’s for instance aren’t solid (in fact, they’re rock solid), just that none of them have seen wide mainstream adoption. It’s also good to see that 96 percent of Java code has been cleared for Open Source use. That should mean that a public release is well on its way.

–jeremy

Filed under Linux, Open Source, Sun

Announcing the 2007 Linux Desktop/Client Survey

October 19, 2007 Leave a comment

From The Linux Foundation:

The Linux Foundation Linux Desktop Workgroup is conducting a survey.

The information from this survey will assist the Linux Foundation Desktop Linux workgroup to focus on areas of development that are important to you. The results of this survey may also be valuable to your business. Once you complete the survey, you will be able to view the current aggregated public results of the survey.

The 2007 Linux Desktop/Client Survey asks you to answer a few questions based on your company’s desktop/client plans and not necessarily your personal desktop usage.

If you provide contact information at the end of the survey, the survey results and analysis will be sent to you when the survey is complete. Note: contact information is not a required entry and your contact information will not be published or shared.

–jeremy

Filed under Linux, Linux Foundation

OSI Approves Microsoft License Submissions

October 18, 2007 Leave a comment

A few moths ago, Microsoft submitted the Microsoft Permissive License (Ms-PL) and the Microsoft Community License (Ms-CL) to the OSI for approval. Both have been approved, albeit with some modifications, including name changes for both. From the official announcement:

Acting on the advice of the License Approval Chair, the OSI Board today approved the Microsoft Public License (Ms-PL) and the Microsoft Reciprocal License (Ms-RL). The decision to approve was informed by the overwhelming (though not unanimous) consensus from the open source community that these licenses satisfied the 10 criteria of the Open Source definition, and should therefore be approved.

The formal evaluation of these licenses began in August and the discussion of these licenses was vigourous and thorough. The community raised questions that Microsoft (and others) answered; they raised issues that, when germane to the licenses in question, Microsoft addressed. Microsoft came to the OSI and submitted their licenses according to the published policies and procedures that dozens of other parties have followed over the years. Microsoft didn’t ask for special treatment, and didn’t receive any. In spite of recent negative interactions between Microsoft and the open source community, the spirit of the dialog was constructive and we hope that carries forward to a constructive outcome as well.

Some in the community wanted these licenses to be rejected solely on the fact that it was Microsoft that submitted them. While it’s easy to be mistrusting of MSFT, that would have been being petty for the sake of being petty and not at all in the spirit of the Open Source community. If you truly believe in choice and these licenses meet the OSD (and the OSI thinks they do), then it’s reasonable that they should be legitimate options, regardless of who came up with them. Russ has more to say in this blog post:

Of course, Microsoft is not widely trusted in the Open Source world, and their motives have been called into question during the approval discussions. How can they be attacking Open Source projects on one hand, and seeking not only to use open source methods, but use of the OSI Approved Open Source trademark? Nobody knows for sure except for Microsoft. But if you are confident that Open Source is the best way to develop software (as we at the Open Source Initiative are), then you can see why Microsoft would both attack Open Source and seek to use it at the same time. It is both their salvation and their enemy.

It should be interesting to see where Microsoft goes from here. This isn’t carte blanche for them to start claiming Open Source after all, as only code licensed under one of these two licenses qualifies as Open Source.

Additional coverage:
Matt Asay
Matthew Aslett

–jeremy

Filed under Microsoft, Open Source, OSI

Patent Infringement Lawsuit Filed Against Red Hat & Novell III

October 18, 2007 2 Comments

(coverage continues)

Via 451 CAOS Theory: It looks like the Acacia lawsuit may indeed have little to do with Open Source and be just another general patent troll case. From the article:

The nation’s first Linux patent suit currently facing Red Hat and Novell isn’t about open source at all. Or so the plaintiff says.

IP Innovation last week filed the patent lawsuit against Linux in Texas, alleging that both Red Hat and Novell infringe on U.S. Patent No. 5,072,412, “User Interface with Multiple Workspaces for Sharing Display System Objects.”

Neither IP Innovation nor its parent company Acacia Research responded to request for comment at the time the patent suit first came to light. But today, in a statement sent to InternetNews.com, Acacia Chairman and CEO Paul Ryan defended the firm’s actions and argued that there is no conspiracy against open source coming from his firm.

“IP Innovation is not attempting to inject itself in the ongoing philosophical debate of whether products or services which utilize open source are subject to the same intellectual property laws/behaviors as non-open source offerings,” Ryan said in the statement. “Acacia and its subsidiaries do not philosophically differentiate any company, but rather seek to consistently and fairly monetize patent rights from those companies which incorporate patented technology.”

The company also dismissed allegations that Microsoft somehow is using Acacia as a kind of proxy to fight a patent battle against Linux. A pair of key Acacia employees recently joined the patent-holding firm from Microsoft.

Additionally, Groklaw notes that the patent involved is scheduled to expire on December 10, 2008. That could explain why Microsoft, who could easily afford to ensure that the case lasts longer than that, has not been made a target. It’s strangely reassuring to see that this probably doesn’t have anything to do with Open Source. That’s a sad indication of the state of the current situation.

–jeremy

Filed under Microsoft, Novell, Open Source, Red Hat

Apple: "we plan to have an iPhone SDK in developers' hands in February"

October 18, 2007 1 Comment

Apple has finally officially announced a real SDK for the iPhone. From the Apple announcement:

Third Party Applications on the iPhone

Let me just say it: We want native third party applications on the iPhone, and we plan to have an SDK in developers’ hands in February. We are excited about creating a vibrant third party developer community around the iPhone and enabling hundreds of new applications for our users. With our revolutionary multi-touch interface, powerful hardware and advanced software architecture, we believe we have created the best mobile platform ever for developers.

It will take until February to release an SDK because we’re trying to do two diametrically opposed things at once—provide an advanced and open platform to developers while at the same time protect iPhone users from viruses, malware, privacy attacks, etc. This is no easy task. Some claim that viruses and malware are not a problem on mobile phones—this is simply not true. There have been serious viruses on other mobile phones already, including some that silently spread from phone to phone over the cell network. As our phones become more powerful, these malicious programs will become more dangerous. And since the iPhone is the most advanced phone ever, it will be a highly visible target.

Some companies are already taking action. Nokia, for example, is not allowing any applications to be loaded onto some of their newest phones unless they have a digital signature that can be traced back to a known developer. While this makes such a phone less than “totally open,” we believe it is a step in the right direction. We are working on an advanced system which will offer developers broad access to natively program the iPhone’s amazing software platform while at the same time protecting users from malicious programs.

There’s a lot of speculation about whether or not the dedicated iPhone hackers forced Apples’ hand on this. Looking at the Springboard breakdown, some amount of support for additional apps has been there since the beginning. The latest 1.1.1 release seems to have increased that. The question is: with the PR beating it was taking, why didn’t Apple announce this when the iPhone was initially released, and what took them so long? Only Jobs knows for sure, but announcing it from the very beginning would likely have caused some people to hold off on their purchase. As for what’s taking so long, it could be a variety of things. The latest firmware release clearly shows that the iPhone platform is still a rapidly moving target. Apple may just want things to stabilize a bit before letting others in. It will be interesting to see how Apple rolls this out. Will apps have to be digitally signed by Apple? Will the only installation mechanism be iTunes? We’ll have to wait and see. While I’m glad to see this announcement (although they really didn’t have much of a choice in the end if they wanted a truly successful product long term), it’s probably not enough for me not to switch to an OpenMoko device in December.

–jeremy

Filed under Apple, iPhone, OpenMoko

Nokia N810 gets official

October 18, 2007 Leave a comment

Regular blog readers will know that I really like my Nokia N800. On that note, it’s great to see that Nokia just officially announced the N810. The N810 is fairly similar to the N800, but now includes a built in QWERTY keyboard and GPS (which were certainly two of the most requested features, so Nokia is listening). You can see a more complete comparison here. The updates on the N810 look great and I’d guess that the next generation device (N900?) is going to be an absolutely killer device.

–jeremy

Filed under Linux, maemo, Nokia, Open Source

Travel Day: San Francisco

October 15, 2007 Leave a comment

I’ll be in San Francisco for the next couple days. If you’re in the Bay Area and would like to connect, feel free to drop me a line. See you on the other coast.

–jeremy

Filed under LinuxQuestions.org

Patent Infringement Lawsuit Filed Against Red Hat & Novell II

October 13, 2007 2 Comments

(A follow up to previous coverage)

As you may have guessed, this topic is being discussed heavily around the web. Mark Radcliffe points out that Open Source companies are likely becoming a more tempting target to patent trolls due to the stunning growth in the sector (keep in mind that Microsoft, Apple, et al. put up with this kind of thing all the time):

Although I and many attorneys in the open source industry have long been concerned about patent challenges to open source companies, this case appears to be the first by patent trolls against an open source licensor. The open source industry provides a tempting target because of its rapid growth. This morning, Eben Moglen at the Software Freedow Law Center Seminar on FOSS issues noted that Brad Bunnell of Microsoft joined Acacia on October 1 . According to news reports, Brad spent sixteen years at Microsoft at a number of positions which included General Manager, Intellectual Property Licensing. http://biz.yahoo.com/bw/071001/20071001005590.html?.v=1

Eben raises the intriguing question about whether these incidents are related. Given the time that it takes to prepare a patent lawsuit, Brad’s hiring probably did not effect the filing of this lawsuit. However the hiring may indicate the addition of a new business line for Acacia: suits against open source companies. Steve Ballmer’s recent comments about Red Hat’s obligation to pay Microsoft for alleged use of its patents makes this lawsuit and the timing of the move interesting.

Matt Asay points out a list of coincidences:

* One or more former Microsoft licensing execs join Acacia or one or its companies;
* Ballmer makes his most recent statement regarding Red Hat;
* Almost the same day, Red Hat (and presumbably Novell) receive notice of the alleged infringement from IP Innovation (Acacia);
* Before either company has a chance to consider the letter and respond, IP Innovation files its lawsuit in Texas;
* Novell changes all of its IP indemnification the same day (which it has named “Technology Assurance Program” as contrasted with Red Hat’s Open Source Assurance Program Novell apparently isn’t interested in assuring open source, just technology ;-);
* Novell’s new program notes a change in the Microsoft/Novell deal that covers GPLv3 code distributed by Novell for downstream recipients.

Hmm….I forget sometimes who is on which team, but it certainly seems like two sides have been conspiring on this, and I don’t mean IP Innovation and Microsoft (which is almost a given).

Stephen Walli (who was still at Microsoft when the SCO suit was launched) gives some advice that I couldn’t agree with more: Take a deep breath. Be calm. He continues:

The U.S. Supreme Court continues to involve itself in the broken patent system. The Linux Foundation and the Open Invention Network are both geared for this particular fight. I have confidence that the Groklaw community will step into the breach of reporting and investigation again. IBM, Intel, and HP have a vested interest in the outcome, and nobody plays IP games the way IBM does. Over the next few weeks, lawyers will come together behind the scenes from all the interested parties on the defending side. Hopefully egos won’t be too large, and a coherent plan of negotiation will emerge.

Some of the more interesting questions for me will be:

* Why Red Hat AND Novell?
* Why not Microsoft? (Acacia went after Apple who settled. Microsoft would seem to have deeper pockets than Red Hat or Novell. It would seem to be the more interesting business discussion.)
* If Microsoft is not involved, should they be? If Apple settled, and then this suit settles, Microsoft should know they’re next on the list. Or are they trusting IBM et al to win this one for them?

To quote one of my favourite lawyers in this space:

“If the F/OSS community wants to be in commercial space, community members will have to learn to deal calmly with IP litigation. The F/OSS production model will work where it makes sense, and it will not work where it doesn’t. It’s really just that simple. Particular claims in individual suits—even one against a flagship program such as the GNU/Linux OS—will not determine the fate of the community. Such cases present factual issues that will get resolved one way or another; they do not represent a crisis for F/OSS production as a whole. Norm entrepreneurial rhetoric that plays off such cases should be treated as entertainment. Enjoy it if you like it, take inspiration from it if you must, but don’t confuse it with the way things actually get done.”

I’m sure some former colleagues at Microsoft are excited. Mr. Smith and Mr. Ballmer most assuredly. But just as with the SCO Group litigation, there is no reason to celebrate. They shouldn’t confuse this with “the way things actually get done.” Pax.

I do find it interesting that Acacia went from Apple to Red Hat / Novell, when Microsoft surely would have been a much more compelling target from a business perspective. It becomes a simple case of follow the money from there. More information will come out of this in the coming weeks and months, so staying calm and focusing on what’s important is surely the correct course of action.

–jeremy

Filed under Apple, Linux, Microsoft, MSFT, Novell, Open Source, Red Hat

Are people still having issues with iPods and Linux?

October 12, 2007 2 Comments

I ask this because, much to my surprise, this three year old post about the iPod working out of the box in Fedora gets a surprising number of views on a daily basis. All the requests are the result of web searches, which makes me wonder if people really are still having problems. There’s not a distribution I’ve tried in the last couple years where whatever mp3 player I plugged into it didn’t work out of the box immediately. Curious…

–jeremy

Filed under Apple, Fedora, Linux

← Older posts

Newer posts →