We do often include affiliate links to earn us some pennies. See more here.

In a move that's going to raise a lot of eyebrows, Microsoft has joined the Open Invention Network to 'protect Linux and other important open source workloads from patent assertions'.

For those who haven't heard of the OIN, their mission statement is quite a simple and honourable one "The Open Invention Network is a shared defensive patent pool with the mission to protect Linux.". To find out more about the OIN see here.

Hold the phone, this isn't gaming news?

Correct. However, this is still very interesting and extremely surprising from a company that has been pretty hostile to Linux in the past. It's the kind of move that could result in some big shifts in the entire industry.

We know Microsoft’s decision to join OIN may be viewed as surprising to some; it is no secret that there has been friction in the past between Microsoft and the open source community over the issue of patents. For others who have followed our evolution, we hope this announcement will be viewed as the next logical step for a company that is listening to customers and developers and is firmly committed to Linux and other open source programs. 

Surprising is one word for it! Honestly, I'm in shock at this news. Does this mean we can firmly put the "Embrace, extend, and extinguish" phrase to rest and replace it with Embrace, extend, and protect? With Microsoft joining, they're bringing with them around 60,000 patents.

Moves like that, makes me seriously think about how Microsoft have changed, especially since their previous CEO Steve Ballmer called Linux "a cancer".

I think it also shows how far Linux has come as a platform for all things too, especially with Microsoft having a "Windows Subsystem for Linux" along with their support for running Linux on their Azure cloud computing platform.

What do you think to this?

Article taken from GamingOnLinux.com.
22 Likes
About the author -
author picture
I am the owner of GamingOnLinux. After discovering Linux back in the days of Mandrake in 2003, I constantly came back to check on the progress of Linux until Ubuntu appeared on the scene and it helped me to really love it. You can reach me easily by emailing GamingOnLinux directly. Find me on Mastodon.
See more from me
The comments on this article are closed.
123 comments
Page: «11/13»
  Go to:

Appelsin Oct 12, 2018
Quoting: amatai
Quoting: AppelsinI'd wager assimilation rather than protection. As for protection, I suspect it's more a case of "if we can't steal 'em, noone else will get to either."
But they get tons of money from patent attack on Linux (directly or via patent troll, look for intelectual venture founded by Gate & co).
Maybe its war between services but assimilation is the most likely, Linux is no longer a threat, why?

They are sticking their noses into more and more Linux centric services, foundations and whatnot. Thus they can influence the internal politics of those. And while they might make money from patent attacks, they could realise that being on the inside and preventing other companies from possibly stealing and licensing technologies they rely on, they'll rather "protect" them to keep using them. Note, that I'm only specualting in a very cynical state of mind here :D


Quoting: jens
Quoting: AppelsinAnd no, I'm not giving Microsoft the benefit of the doubt. We'll see, the day they kill off DX, open source it, and merge what ever aspects of DX that might be worth keeping into Vulkan, and makes Excel/MSOffice available on Linux natively. Then we'll talk about Microsoft having actually turned a new page, instead of putting make-up on the good 'ol pig :)

I guess you know that your demands are completely unrealistic. It is perfectly cool that you'll never trust Microsoft's moves regardless of what they do. Please just state it like this. ;)

Yeah, I'm under no illusions that it'll actually happen anytime soon, and if it does, 99.99% certainly not for the "right" reasons ;)
Nevertheless, I'm a bit relucant to say "never", since there are moves they could make to actually show that it's more than a marketing scheme (or at least make a very convincing show of it). If they were to actually "love open source" by making (non-gimped) Office available on Linux, open DX --> merge to Vulkan, then I'd be inclined to think that "yes, maybe Microsoft actually want to redeem themselves. At least, their actions are pointing in that direction, so yeah, OK, I'll give them a chance."

What I'm getting at is "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence". I could come to "trust" Microsoft if they were willing to show their good intent in a spectacular way, but marketing slogans and posturing only deepens the mistrust and feeling og ill intent. Unrealistic? Yes. Night impossible? Yes. Completely and utterly impossible? No.
tuubi Oct 12, 2018
View PC info
  • Supporter
This conversation is getting a bit surreal. People arguing about whether we should trust Microsoft? Really?

I don't see why I should trust Microsoft even as far as I trust other gigantic corporations like Google, Amazon, Facebook or Coca Cola. Which is about as far as I can throw a hippo. There's just no chance of any of them ever putting the consumer before the investor or ideals before profit. Except maybe where forced to do so by governments.

In fact, I think it's extremely naïve to ever truly trust a public corporation. We buy their products knowing (and ignoring) that while they might be cheap, or even the only convenient option due to a market monopoly or whatever, they sure as hell don't deserve our trust for either of these reasons. They are not cheap because they want you to have an opportunity to enjoy their products, and they aren't the only option because nobody else wanted a slice of the cake. Ideally we should be able to trust the system(s) to keep the corporations in check and protect our rights, but we all know that these multinationals have more power than some nations.

But hey, capitalism—in the form it takes in the real world—depends on people going against their best interests. Otherwise none of these businesses would have had the opportunity to corner their respective markets as they did.
cprn Oct 12, 2018
I'll believe they've "changed" when they make all their new DirectX releases just thin open source wrappers around Vulkan and only support GPUs with open drivers. Now that would raise a lot of eyebrows. Mostly in Nvidia corner.
jens Oct 12, 2018
  • Supporter
Quoting: tuubiThis conversation is getting a bit surreal. People arguing about whether we should trust Microsoft? Really?

I don't see why I should trust Microsoft even as far as I trust other gigantic corporations like Google, Amazon, Facebook or Coca Cola. Which is about as far as I can throw a hippo. There's just no chance of any of them ever putting the consumer before the investor or ideals before profit. Except maybe where forced to do so by governments.

In fact, I think it's extremely naïve to ever truly trust a public corporation. We buy their products knowing (and ignoring) that while they might be cheap, or even the only convenient option due to a market monopoly or whatever, they sure as hell don't deserve our trust for either of these reasons. They are not cheap because they want you to have an opportunity to enjoy their products, and they aren't the only option because nobody else wanted a slice of the cake. Ideally we should be able to trust the system(s) to keep the corporations in check and protect our rights, but we all know that these multinationals have more power than some nations.

But hey, capitalism—in the form it takes in the real world—depends on people going against their best interests. Otherwise none of these businesses would have had the opportunity to corner their respective markets as they did.

Trusting is indeed the wrong wording. I guess most people here, me including, are discussing if the relation between company and customer is more a win-win or more of a win-loose. Some companies want to earn a profit by somehow improving the situation of their customers in the broadest sense (win-win), other just want to earn a profit while solemnly cheating on their customers (win-loose). Most companies are somewhere in-between of that wide spectrum and some tend to shift a little bit in one direction or the other once in a while imho.


Last edited by jens on 12 October 2018 at 4:53 pm UTC
Kristian Oct 12, 2018
Quoting: cprnI'll believe they've "changed" when they make all their new DirectX releases just thin open source wrappers around Vulkan and only support GPUs with open drivers. Now that would raise a lot of eyebrows. Mostly in Nvidia corner.

But just open sourcing their current(and future) DX versions wouldn't be enough? Even if they ported it to Linux? It has to be on top of Vulkan?


Last edited by Kristian on 13 October 2018 at 2:34 pm UTC
amatai Oct 13, 2018
http://techrights.org/2018/10/10/lotnetwork-msft-and-now-oin/
A more in depth answer about what it is not a good news as it may seems superficially.
Basically, Microsoft still does tons of patent trolling, he does not have given to OIN the patent used on patent trolling and the move can be seen as a way to legitimate software patent.
Purple Library Guy Oct 13, 2018
Quoting: amataihttp://techrights.org/2018/10/10/lotnetwork-msft-and-now-oin/
A more in depth answer about what it is not a good news as it may seems superficially.
Basically, Microsoft still does tons of patent trolling, he does not have given to OIN the patent used on patent trolling and the move can be seen as a way to legitimate software patent.
I'm never sure about techrights. Their basic position tends to agree with my prejudices, but the style is ranty and the articles always seem mostly to link to other techrights articles; generally it comes off too dodgy for me to trust even though it caters to me.
amatai Oct 13, 2018
The style is ranty as hell, but I never saw them lying and even if they mostly source themselves, when they write their articles, the info used are everywhere on the news.
So I'm still cautious about them but no more than with mainstream newspaper from my country
Purple Library Guy Oct 13, 2018
So I looked at the techrights article. It spends a whole lot of words saying little, and it's hard to tease out exactly what it's saying is bad about this. Frankly I think it's quite bad writing. But ultimately it seems to come down to a few things:

1. The OIN itself is problematic because it gets everyone to treat software patents like they're OK. I can see that point, but that isn't Microsoft's fault and I'm not going to consider Microsoft unusually bad just because they're not coming out backing software patent abolition.
2. Microsoft is holding back certain key patents, noticeably FAT-related ones. I'm not quite sure that's actually true, we've talked about the FAT issue, he seems to be relying on the same source, and what it says is not that Microsoft is holding back those patents but rather that relevant FAT-related code is not in the Linux kernel proper and so not protected by what OIN technically does. This again is not Microsoft's fault. If they are holding back those key patents, that is an issue. But it doesn't make all the other patents they are including in OIN irrelevant.
3. Microsoft have been systematically funneling patents to sort of deniably-affiliated patent trolls and siccing those patent trolls on its opponents rather than getting its own hands dirty, thus allowing it to have its propaganda cake and eat its enemies too. Joining the OIN makes no difference whatsoever to use of this tactic. This is a very important point if true, and would indeed make MS joining the OIN a worthless and deeply cynical move. I have seen techrights articles making this claim before. I've never seen anyone else discussing it, whether to agree or debunk it, so I'm not sure if it's true or not.

Side note . . . shouldn't all that FAT stuff be running out at some point? It's friggin' ancient! Have they been pulling those tricks like the pharma companies do where you tweak it a little and get a bunch of extra time?
DrMcCoy Oct 13, 2018
Quoting: Purple Library Guyshouldn't all that FAT stuff be running out at some point? It's friggin' ancient!

[url="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ExFAT"]exFAT[/url] != FAT. Their patents are still effective for at least 10 years.
While you're here, please consider supporting GamingOnLinux on:

Reward Tiers: Patreon. Plain Donations: PayPal.

This ensures all of our main content remains totally free for everyone! Patreon supporters can also remove all adverts and sponsors! Supporting us helps bring good, fresh content. Without your continued support, we simply could not continue!

You can find even more ways to support us on this dedicated page any time. If you already are, thank you!
The comments on this article are closed.