Matthew Garrett ([info]mjg59) wrote,
@ 2006-11-08 02:44:00
Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend!  Next Entry
The day that Bruce Perens gets to tell me that Novell is the new SCO is the day that I willingly accept an offer to be sodomised with a pneumatic drill.

Novell have contributed more code to Linux than pretty much any other single commercial entity other than Red Hat. Without the Novell kernel developers, Linux would be in a much worse state than it currently is. However, I'd expect that everyone in Novell knows that they're also entirely dependent upon the developers working for other distributions. Killing every other distribution isn't advantageous to Novell. And, perhaps more importantly, the death of Novell would be a (short-term?) disaster for every other distribution. Debian may have a larger market share than Novell, but if Novell dies then that's going to be a share of a very small market.

The Linux community doesn't need to eat its own. And one very basic fact does still remain - if Microsoft couldn't sue you before, they still can't sue you. If you're legal, nothing Novell can do will alter that.

(It's sort of touching that Bruce has time to comment on this sort of thing, but didn't seem to find time to make Linuxworldexpocontinentconferencecountymeeting last month. Thanks, Bruce. Thruce. But hey, you're in the credits for A Bug's Life and Toy Story II!)

(Post a new comment)


[info]ronebofh
2006-11-08 02:50 am UTC (link)
Heh. I was eagerly awaiting your weighing-in on the subject. Well, yours and ELER's.

My friend Harley had a saying for people like Perens: "Don't make me slap you with nine inches of limp dick."

(Reply to this) (Thread)

[info]mjg59
2006-11-08 02:56 am UTC (link)
It's almost like Bruce had done almost nothing for Linux since 1998, but still wanted to claim squatter's rights.

Actually, no. It's precisely like that.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

(Anonymous)
2006-11-08 07:13 pm UTC (link)
Yes, indeed it is. And that's one reason he was voted off the SPI board: not only did he skip most meetings, he didn't even bother to tell anyone he wouldn't be there most of the time.

And when it came to campaign time, all he talked about was the things he did in the 90s. Never mind that some of them have been rewritten twice because they had problems.

-- jgoerzen

(Reply to this) (Parent)

[info]fiona_kitty
2006-11-08 02:57 am UTC (link)
I willingly accept an offer to be sodomised with a pneumatic drill.

Hurrah. Can I watch?

(Reply to this) (Thread)

[info]mjg59
2006-11-08 03:13 am UTC (link)
If it should ever happen, yes. I wouldn't get your hopes up.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

[info]fiona_kitty
2006-11-08 03:15 am UTC (link)
I have ways and means. Do not underestimate me.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

[info]hub_
2006-11-08 03:32 pm UTC (link)
I almost spilled coffee all over the laptop. It would have been a waste... for the laptop.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

(Anonymous)
2006-11-08 04:27 am UTC (link)
The day that Bruce Perens gets to tell me that Novell is the new SCO is the day that I willingly accept an offer to be sodomised with a pneumatic drill.

apparently that day would be... today. go easy on the drill bud.

(Reply to this)


[info]womble2
2006-11-08 12:09 pm UTC (link)
Without the Novell kernel developers, Linux would be in a much worse state than it currently is.

So, entirely unlike the contributions of Caldera^WSCO? But anyway, my interpretation is that Microsoft, not Novell, is playing the SCO role.

[I]f Microsoft couldn't sue you before, they still can't sue you. If you're legal, nothing Novell can do will alter that.

They could and can sue anyone. The point is that one big patent licensee feeds their FUD about unlicensed distributions. The threat looks more serious if one company appears to have decided that it was in violation of MS patents.

It's sort of touching that Bruce has time to comment on this sort of thing, but didn't seem to find time to make Linuxworldexpocontinentconferencecountymeeting last month.

You wanted him to turn up?

(Reply to this) (Thread)

[info]mjg59
2006-11-08 04:41 pm UTC (link)
The point is that one big patent licensee feeds their FUD about unlicensed distributions. The threat looks more serious if one company appears to have decided that it was in violation of MS patents.

If the primary objection to it all is that it's negative PR for the other distributions, then I can entirely understand that. But it's not a betrayal, it's not the end of Linux and it's trivially counteracted by improving education about the patent protection plans that other distributions have.

You wanted him to turn up?

No, I just note that Bruce seems to be awfully good at finding time when there's an opportunity to make himself look important, but seems to be dreadfully bad at actually meeting commitments. Such as turning up to OSI board meetings.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

[info]airstrip_one
2006-11-08 01:12 pm UTC (link)
"Our agreement with Microsoft is focused on our customers, and does not include a patent license or covenant not to sue from Microsoft to Novell (or, for that matter, from Novell to Microsoft). Novell's customers receive a covenant not to sue directly from Microsoft. We have not agreed with Microsoft to any condition that would contradict the conditions of the GPL and we are in full compliance.

Novell's end user customers receive a covenant not to sue directly from Microsoft for their use of Novell products and services, but these activities are outside the scope of the GPL."

"Q5. Novell's November 2 press release states that, "Novell will also make running royalty payments based on a percentage of its revenues from open source products." Are these payments for a patent license to Novell?

No. Novell has no license or covenant not to sue from Microsoft under this agreement. The payments are for Microsoft's covenant directly to Novell's customers. By the same token, Microsoft's customers receive the same covenant from Novell in return for payment from Microsoft to Novell." (source, emphasis mine)

This is clearly an attempt by Novell to circumvent the protections of §7 of the GPL by the hands of Microsoft. Novell does, indeed, contribute much to Linux, but it also doesn't seem to mind seriously harming it, as long as Novell's competitors are harmed as well.

(Reply to this)

Novell then != Novell now?
(Anonymous)
2006-11-13 01:52 pm UTC (link)
Yes, Novell is one of the absolute biggest contributers, and mad props to them - however, they have a new boss which has not shared this history and that absolutely need to get money in for shareholders (that's why he's there at all). Add to that, that parts of the deal is secret/NDA, and I don't think you can trust it at all.

Just because old Novell was awesome doesn't mean that a new boss with new motives can't have sold out completely. Something to think about.

(In that case, of course we should blame that guy, not the superb developers and other people that of course haven't turned evil overnight).

(Reply to this) (Thread)
Re: Novell then != Novell now?
[info]mjg59
2006-11-13 02:06 pm UTC (link)
The developers haven't gone away - Novell is still one of the biggest contributors to the kernel, for instance. If that changes, sure, I'll reconsider my opinion.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

[info]ronebofh
2006-11-23 01:25 am UTC (link)
Say, did you want to sign Bruce's petition?

The covenant of the GPL is that in the face of a software patent aggressor we must all hang together, lest we each hang separately.

What the fuck does that mean?

(Reply to this) (Thread)
What does it mean?
(Anonymous)
2006-11-30 01:55 pm UTC (link)
"The covenant of the GPL is that in the face of a software patent aggressor we must all hang together, lest we each hang separately"
>> What the fuck does that mean?

During the discussions leading up to the American Declaration of Independence (perhaps the greatest thing ever put on paper?) Benjamin Franklin said to his fellow delegates "We must all hang together or else we shall certainly hang separately". In other words, their best chance at survival was to stick together or they'd surely be picked off and hung (by the neck) separately.
Novell's action is akin to an ally opening separate peace talks with an enemy in wartime. Except that, as a stockholder owned entity, it's only loyalty is to it's stockholders. Open source believers would do well to remember that. No for-profit contributor can be truly trusted not to eventually fuck the open source community. It's a dog eat cat world. Balancing the scales of justice is the certainty that any deal MS makes with a Linux provider is, at heart, designed to eventually destroy that provider. Novell has swallowed poison. But hey - the CEO will get his huge bonus for temporarily bringing up the stock price.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

[info]ronebofh
2006-11-30 07:15 pm UTC (link)
I am perfectly acquainted with the source of the original "hang separately" statement. That you think you can possibly compare Novell's action to a decision that actually led to a real war speaks very clearly about your delusional state. "No for-profit contributer can be truly trusted not to eventually fuck the open source community"? Not even the individual contributors to the open source community can be trusted to not fuck the community. We're seeing it right now. It's called the human condition. Life is risk. Now shut the fuck up, you anonymous twaddling wankstain.

(Reply to this) (Parent)
Thruce
(Anonymous)
2006-11-26 07:29 am UTC (link)
If I read this correctly, the "thruce" was a reference to the BBC series "Look Around You." And if so, I can only say, "Thanks, Matt. Thatt." I love you.

-Bill Cash (www.billcash.org)

(Reply to this) (Thread)
Re: Thruce
[info]mjg59
2006-11-26 12:34 pm UTC (link)
Entirely correct.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

Create an Account
Forgot your login or password?
Login w/ OpenID
English • Español • Deutsch • Русский…