💾 Archived View for gmi.noulin.net › mobileNews › 166.gmi captured on 2023-01-29 at 08:52:25. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content

-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Red Hat Says No to Microsoft 'Innovation Tax'

2007-06-20 07:58:43

Jennifer LeClaire, newsfactor.com Tue Jun 19, 12:49 PM ET

Controversy is erupting in the

Linux community following news that Xandros and Linspire opted for a pact with

Microsoft, while Ubuntu and Red Hat flat out rejected the advances.

The drama started last November, when Microsoft inked a deal with Novell to

foster interoperability and technical collaboration between the open- and

closed-source operating systems. Novell also got protection from possible

patent suits as part of the agreement.

Soon after, Microsoft came out with allegations that the open-source camp is

infringing on 235 of its patents, and the software giant began making moves to

form alliances with other Linux providers. The company was successful in

negotiating partnerships with Xandros and Linspire, but has hit a wall with

Ubuntu and Red Hat.

Microsoft Deal 'Unthinkable'

Microsoft made its intentions clear on Friday: It wants to work out a

cross-licensing deal with the largest Linux vendor on the market that would

look much the same as its recent agreements with Xandros and Linspire.

Red Hat quickly dashed all hopes, standing on its previous statements from last

November, issued in the wake of the controversial Novell deal. Red Hat left no

room for misinterpretation when it said the company would not compromise on its

open-source roots.

"An innovation tax is unthinkable," the company said in a statement. "Free and

open-source software provide the necessary environment for true innovation.

Innovation without fear or threat. Activities that isolate communities or limit

upstream adoption will inevitably stifle innovation."

Novell's deal with Microsoft is worth hundreds of millions of dollars, an

agreement that helped pull the SuSE Linux vendor out of financial straits.

Xandros and Linspire are much smaller companies that might not have the

financial resources to fight indemnification suits. Ubuntu and Red Hat, by

contrast, might have the financial stability to weather any potential storm,

said Dana Gardner, principal analyst at Interarbor Solutions and a former

Yankee Group Linux analyst.

Where Is the Benefit?

"Because there's a difference in the field on a vendor-by-vendor basis, you

have to wonder if this is about more than legal issues. You have to wonder if

it also has a lot to do with plain old money," Gardner said. "If the largest

distributors are not interested, then that leaves more of a question mark about

what these agreements are really about. Is it about risk-reduction for the end

users or is it about risk-reduction for the vendors?"

Gardner said he has plenty of questions about the deal. For example, he

posited, if getting agreements with companies that are in financially

precarious positions is Microsoft's way of bridging the gap between Linux and

Windows, then how meaningful will these agreements really be?

"If Microsoft's goal is to bring a reduction in risk to those enterprises that

have a mixed environment of Windows and Linux, then the deals with some of the

larger distributors would seemingly make more sense," Gardner said.

"The motivations here can't be just about the welfare and risk-reduction of end

users," he concluded. "There has to be some alternative motive and it's very

likely that there's a hope on Microsoft's part that it can stem any loss of

market share [to] desktop Linux."