Darryl Gregorash wrote:
... I won't even comment on the drivel that suggests Novell *can* dump patented code into the kernel, then assert patent rights over the kernel,
OK, then I will. You don't seem to understand that a patent gives the holder a right to sue anyone who, in the eyes of the holder, violates the patent. And a patent is _supposed_ to be novel, but who verifies that it really is novel? Certainly not the patent bureaucrats, who haven't had a clue for over a hundred years, and have allowed people to patent basically anything the applicant claimed was new and different, with basically no external verification required, or even requested. The RTLinux people patented a technique that had been in use for decades, and no one even challenged them, because it's simply too expensive. I've read that there has been a torrent of software patents granted in the past couple of years, mainly to Microsoft and IBM, but also to others. Do you really think tens of thousands of brand-new software ideas came up in a couple of years? Don't be surprised when Microsoft, with Novell's full support, starts suing distributions over obscure kernel code violating some recent patent, and don't think it'll be easy to get it dismissed simply because the code was there long before the "new" patent was granted. Our brave new court system doesn't work that way, and Microsoft has nearly infinite lawyer resources. If they can hold off the Department of Justice for nearly a decade until a friendly administration comes in and kills the case, do you really think Torvalds and Moglen will be able to hold them off -- even if they're obviously in the right? I don't. I hope for Novell's integrity, without feeling very confident. I'm dead certain that even if Novell is playing it straight, Microsoft is not, and there's big trouble ahead. -- John Perry