Microsoft Has Just Blackmailed Linux Twice in One Single Week and the Media Didn’t Notice or Just Ignored It Because of Microsoft’s Charm Offensives

[dalekphalm]

3 hours ago, Misanthrope said:

For someone criticizing the article I must say you didn't do a good job of reading it yourself: there's no court as these are out of court settlements, hence why they're equating it to racketeering.

Here's the thing. Canonical isn't some tiny no-body indie company. They make $65 Million USD per year in revenue. Sure Microsoft makes Billions, but we're talking about a company that can easily go to court if they believe they are on the right side of the matter.

 

Obviously, Canonical thinks they can't win a court battle, so they settled out of court. Does that mean the system is flawed? No. We have no proof either way, so to just automatically assume they're settling out of court because they're being extorted is asinine. It makes no sense. If Canonical was not infringing on patents, they would have a pretty good chance at winning in Court.

 

Hell, patent infringement CAN happen accidentally, if two companies independently develop an extremely similar design/"thing", but one develops it first. The second company might be completely unaware that their "invention" was already, in fact, invented.

2 hours ago, Blake said:

by that logic the 90% of legal disagreements that don't end up in court, must also be racketeering? The phrase take to court, is to settle a legal matter, it's just that court is the highest level of escalation and "taking to arbitration" or "sending a strongly worded letter from the laywers" just don't sound as good.

 

That also being said, If you can't see the shit writing in this article you need to go back to school.

 

Take:

See that 'deals' (extortion) part? see how it's not actually substantiated at all? The excuse? NDA. Well unfortunately that meant the author is going purely based of hearsay, or is one of the parties involved, and would then be breaching the NDA. Looks like the former to me.

 

Seriously, this is the biggest issue with GNU/Linux, the fucking fanbois "muh-freedom this, muh-freedom that, M$ Shill, M$ is the devil, etc etc" grow the fuck up. Great products though.

I agree here. This article seems to make no sense. The guy is basically just spouting random nonsense and accusing Microsoft of all this with zero evidence. His evidence? IT'S A CONSPIRACY! COVERUP! NDA'S!

2 hours ago, Colonel_Gerdauf said:

I am sorry, but what the bloody hell is that source?

 

I am trying to read the information in the article, but it gets completely drowned out by the visibly spiteful delivery of the message. Whatever objectivity it had is thrown right out the window.

Agreed.

1 hour ago, Misanthrope said:

So just because it's common place for big companies to intimidate smaller ones it makes it ok? Yes it's common for big and/or litigious companies to abuse the flawed copyright laws to intimidate others into settlements. We even created a term for it: patent trolling.

 

It's still gaining money (but in the case of Microsoft, precedent for an inevitable legal battle) by means of intimidation: even if Microsoft cannot prove in court they're the lawful owners of patents AND that companies using GNU/Linux are in fact, infringing said patents, most companies would go bankrupt attempting to litigate said case because the legal system awards monetary investment vs having the law on your side by giving too many concessions to copyright holders.

While it's entirely possible for Microsoft to be Patent Trolling, I think Canonical is big enough that they would fight back if they believed it was in fact just that. That would be like Samsung just rolling over when Apple sues them. Hell no. Despite Apple having SIGNIFICANTLY MORE MONEY then Samsung, Samsung still fights back legally.

[GoodBytes]

44 minutes ago, LittleCarrot said:

What Do I need to Ad? 

Source, explain the news or explain how it is relevant.

You have to make grounds for a discussion. Putting a quote of an article just like that or pretty much, is no good.

[LittleCarrot]

Just now, GoodBytes said:

Source, explain the news or explain how it is relevant.

You have to make grounds for a discussion. Putting a quote of an article just like that or pretty much, is no good.

Don't I already have the source?

[AlTech]

3 hours ago, GoodBytes said:

Also, @LittleCarrot, fix your post because it doesn't meat posting guideline.

So it vegetables the posting guidelines? .

 

Little typo there.

[Godlygamer23]

7 hours ago, Prysin said:

they are a practical monopoly, but not a theoretical one.

 

In practice, you only has MS that can do ALL the things REALLY WELL.

Gaming -> Best experience, selection and functionality is in Windows

Productivity -> Good experience, but it has to fight OSX here.

Server space -> Good experience, but it has to fight Linux here.

 

Linux:

Gaming -> possible, but full of issues

Server space -> damn good

Productivity -> not so good, atleast not in selection of software and plugins

 

OSx

Gaming -> da fuck is this?

Productivity -> we got you covered

Server space -> no no no, servers are custom products, no can do. No free will or alteration allowed.

From what I see here, they're not doing everything really well. Just gaming. They're doing GOOD in other areas, but not amazing - at least according to this post of yours.

[Misanthrope]

4 hours ago, dalekphalm said:

Here's the thing. Canonical isn't some tiny no-body indie company. They make $65 Million USD per year in revenue. Sure Microsoft makes Billions, but we're talking about a company that can easily go to court if they believe they are on the right side of the matter.

 

Obviously, Canonical thinks they can't win a court battle, so they settled out of court. Does that mean the system is flawed? No. We have no proof either way, so to just automatically assume they're settling out of court because they're being extorted is asinine. It makes no sense. If Canonical was not infringing on patents, they would have a pretty good chance at winning in Court.

 

Hell, patent infringement CAN happen accidentally, if two companies independently develop an extremely similar design/"thing", but one develops it first. The second company might be completely unaware that their "invention" was already, in fact, invented.

I agree here. This article seems to make no sense. The guy is basically just spouting random nonsense and accusing Microsoft of all this with zero evidence. His evidence? IT'S A CONSPIRACY! COVERUP! NDA'S!

Agreed.

While it's entirely possible for Microsoft to be Patent Trolling, I think Canonical is big enough that they would fight back if they believed it was in fact just that. That would be like Samsung just rolling over when Apple sues them. Hell no. Despite Apple having SIGNIFICANTLY MORE MONEY then Samsung, Samsung still fights back legally.

Disagreed: Samsung is significantly smaller than the biggest company in the entire planet, but it's still positively massive vs what amounts to one moderately wealthy millionaire which is what Canonical is: Mark Shuttleworth and whatever he can muster. Which is just realistically not enough to defend in court vs an army of lawyers since Microsoft is several orders of magnitude wealthier and better prepared.

 

Without a court case we cannot conclude if they indeed have law on their side or not. But 65 million at year is nowhere near enough since again, using the same example, Apple pays that much per year in legal fees just for one case.

 

So really, how can you claim that the system isn't broken when we can clearly see from other tech companies litigating about copyright that this is the exact case here: you really think a company giving almost 100% of their yearly revenue in legal fees is realistic to move forward with a court case? Nonsense.

[RagnarokDel]

Techrights is some bullshit biased news site that gives your eyes aids and cancer.

 

In comparison, WCCFtech is the most reliable news site in the world.

 

Dude on that site literally said Bill Gates spreads polio to africans.

 

Hell, most of the sources they use are other articles they made themselves.

Quote

Gates has been lobbying almost exclusively for his investments, using the disguise of “charity”. Let’s consider that he exploits the world’s poorest for marketing and experimentation. Take Africa for example. Gates has investments in the leaky oil industry there (for profit) which is actually responsible for poisoning and killing many Nigerians, sometimes indirectly (even causing polio, as opposed to fighting polio as Gates likes to claim in the Nigerian press that he buys).

http://techrights.org/2013/05/28/marching-against-monopoly/

 

10 hours ago, LittleCarrot said:

The only person who can fight Microsoft is Apple. Dose OS X have more games than Linux? Steam OS can bring Linux up in the gaming market, but also that might not work.

You're delusional if you think OSX is able to compete with any version of Windows let alone all of them.  Even Windows XP is several times more popular then OSX.

[HarmFull]

11 hours ago, Secondmineboy said:

As Tim Sweeney says MS wants to be a monopole .......

They've always wanted that. The fact that they had to keep wordperfect alive just to keep Office from being a monopole is crazy enough

[JewPacaBraZ]

10 hours ago, Prysin said:

they are a practical monopoly, but not a theoretical one.

 

In practice, you only has MS that can do ALL the things REALLY WELL.

Gaming -> Best experience, selection and functionality is in Windows

Productivity -> Good experience, but it has to fight OSX here.

Server space -> Good experience, but it has to fight Linux here.

 

Linux:

Gaming -> possible, but full of issues

Server space -> damn good

Productivity -> not so good, atleast not in selection of software and plugins

 

OSx

Gaming -> da fuck is this?

Productivity -> we got you covered

Server space -> no no no, servers are custom products, no can do. No free will or alteration allowed.

well i totally agree with that but linux can do things too i used linux a bit (i am used to windows) but i know people that use it and are very satisfied and never forget linux is free and windows isnt very cheap(im here to learn i dont know many things)

[Steveoc64]

I for one would be extremely pissed off about this ..... if it meant that ANY of my hard-earned was ending up in Microsoft's pocket.

 

But its not, because I cant recall a time where I have ever paid a cent for any Linux OS.  I pay for my OS of choice through personal contributions to code. If MS wants to use any of MY code patches  in stuff they are building, then Im fine with that, and dont expect any "royalties" or other bullshit. 

 

What this story is saying is that Microsoft is extorting cash out of other corporate entities that are making cash out of Linux. How are these corporate entities making cash out of Linux ?  No idea, but its probably something involving bullshit licencing schemes based on 19th Century Law, or Advertising ... or selling poisonous vaccines to young children even.  No idea !

 

I really dont care what these people collectively waste their lives and talents on ....   so if they are all going at each others throats like the ignorant savages they are ... well so be it, could we expect anything less from this crowd ?  Extort away !   The so called "Money" they are fighting over is all on extremely shaky ground anyway, so they may as well be fighting over who has the best seat on the Titanic.  Go for it !

 

There is another side to this story, and another agenda being played out  ... but thats a very deep Rabbit hole.to go down, and I wont try to bore / scare you with.  Most of this is (I strongly believe) part of an ongoing battle for economic survival between a declining US economy, and an emerging China / BRICS economy.  Do your own research to see more.

 

[suicidalfranco]

2 hours ago, Steveoc64 said:

I for one would be extremely pissed off about this ..... if it meant that ANY of my hard-earned was ending up in Microsoft's pocket.

 

But its not, because I cant recall a time where I have ever paid a cent for any Linux OS.  I pay for my OS of choice through personal contributions to code. If MS wants to use any of MY code patches  in stuff they are building, then Im fine with that, and dont expect any "royalties" or other bullshit. 

 

What this story is saying is that Microsoft is extorting cash out of other corporate entities that are making cash out of Linux. How are these corporate entities making cash out of Linux ?  No idea, but its probably something involving bullshit licencing schemes based on 19th Century Law, or Advertising ... or selling poisonous vaccines to young children even.  No idea !

 

I really dont care what these people collectively waste their lives and talents on ....   so if they are all going at each others throats like the ignorant savages they are ... well so be it, could we expect anything less from this crowd ?  Extort away !   The so called "Money" they are fighting over is all on extremely shaky ground anyway, so they may as well be fighting over who has the best seat on the Titanic.  Go for it !

 

There is another side to this story, and another agenda being played out  ... but thats a very deep Rabbit hole.to go down, and I wont try to bore / scare you with.  Most of this is (I strongly believe) part of an ongoing battle for economic survival between a declining US economy, and an emerging China / BRICS economy.  Do your own research to see more.

 

Howdothis Linux corporations make money? For the majority by offering support, warranty and training

[popman]

17 hours ago, LittleCarrot said:

--snip--

Can you edit this post to make it clear what these two examples are?

 

 

The apparent patent on sudo a couple of years ago blows this out of the water, but I guess this is new.

[CoolaxGaming]

18 hours ago, Fetzie said:

Microsoft has a de facto monopoly in the market for desktop operating systems and office software. They have a 90+% market share.

 

And that is completely ignoring their product stack in the enterprise sector (microsoft server, sql, exchange and so on).

I do not think you know what a monopoly is. A monopoly is not a company having a high market share, its a company putting down others to make them less successful through controlling supply and demand. And in this case, they are patent trolling, which is not considered monopolizing, but competition.

Microsoft has been tried in court for being a monopoly, and the result was "False claim"

[Sunshine1868]

20 hours ago, SamStrecker said:

linux will loose. Like always 

You must be a Windows user...

Maybe you should try having your little paperclip buddy correct your spelling.

[patrick3027]

20 hours ago, spwath said:

They dont have a real monopoly, its not their fault the competition sucks

They don't have a monopoly? Tell that to Netscape; or are you going to say Internet Explorer is better?

 

Quote

 

The Findings of Fact also establish that Microsoft's anticompetitive conduct was not limited to its battle with Netscape, but instead went well beyond the so-called "browser wars." When Intel, for example, began developing software that would go directly to the equipment manufacturers and bypass Windows, Microsoft Chairman Bill Gates went straight to the top.

Gates told Grove that he had a fundamental problem with Intel using revenues from its microprocessor business to fund the development and distribution of free platform level software. . . . Faced with Gates' threat, Intel agreed to stop. . . . Findings ¶ 102.

Similarly, Microsoft attempted to use the leverage provided by the Windows monopoly to persuade IBM to stop competing in the market for applications software.

When IBM refused to abate the promotion of those of its own products that competed with Windows and Office, Microsoft punished the IBM PC Company with higher prices, a late license for Windows 95, and the withholding of technical and marketing support. Findings ¶ 116.

In addition to these examples, the Findings of Fact also establish that Microsoft threatened or otherwise engaged in anticompetitive conduct on numerous other occasions, involving such major companies as Apple, AOL, Intuit, Real Networks and Sun Microsystems.

 

http://www.pff.org/issues-pubs/pops/pop7.4microsoftmonopolyfacts.html

[MEC-777]

More and more MS is pushing me towards using Linux as my primary OS. Just a matter of time...

[Energycore]

I just find it funny that the idea that a person or company can't win a lawsuit because they "can't pay for as many attorneys as the other party" is commonplace and accepted. Doesn't that defeat the purpose of having a law system?

[Colonel_Gerdauf]

You have got to be kidding me!

 

What happened exactly with that whole "journalistic integrity" augment that everybody was screaming at the top of their lungs 20 months ago? Well, so much for that, seeing as how gullible some members in this thread have been.

 

RTFA.

[BuckGup]

4 hours ago, Sunshine1868 said:

You must be a Windows user...

Maybe you should try having your little paperclip buddy correct your spelling.

ehh I was tired

[TidaLWaveZ]

On ‎3‎/‎12‎/‎2016 at 5:40 PM, Kloaked said:

I lost brain cells reading through this thread.

I am now 5 minutes dumber.

[theanimun]

Isnt [the] Linux [kernel] listed under an open source license?

If its just the kernel thats open source then,no one person owns rights enough to blackmail anyone

[LittleCarrot]

Interesting

[LittleCarrot]

On 3/15/2016 at 3:16 PM, theanimun said:

Isnt [the] Linux [kernel] listed under an open source license?

If its just the kernel thats open source then,no one person owns rights enough to blackmail anyone

i think thatsd whats screwing them over.

[theanimun]

On ‎3‎/‎12‎/‎2016 at 4:43 PM, Fetzie said:

Microsoft has a de facto monopoly in the market for desktop operating systems and office software. They have a 90+% market share.

 

And that is completely ignoring their product stack in the enterprise sector (microsoft server, sql, exchange and so on).

And this is mainly because big retailers dont wanna sell linux computers, and because apple is picky on who can sell thier products (seriously i havent seen a mac outside of the apple store or maybe even best buy)

[dalekphalm]

2 hours ago, theanimun said:

And this is mainly because big retailers dont wanna sell linux computers, and because apple is picky on who can sell thier products (seriously i havent seen a mac outside of the apple store or maybe even best buy)

Dell is also very picky about who can sell their computers, and yet they are one of the biggest computer manufacturers by volume in the world.

 

Apple's marketshare is not directly related to the amount of retail exposure they have. There might be some correlation, but as we all know, correlation does not equal causation.