Once More unto the Breach

Linux Deep in the Heart of Sicily

Copyright © 2008 by Tony Schofield, All rights reserved.

A friend sent me this picture this morning. He and his wife retired to Rome for a year and they're enjoying their time travelling around Italy and its environs. In his words:

"I took the photo in this little village in the middle of Sicily, a village in which the height of technical sophistication was most likely the telephone and where farmers use their tractors and tiny powered garden carts as their method of transportation to drive to the village."

I think we can add this one to the ubiquity tally.

FTC Settlement on Patent Abuse and Standards (and Open Source Implications)

Andy updegrove posted great news this morning on his standards blog. The US Federal Trade Commission (FTC) announced its resolution that a patent licensing promise made by a patent holder in a standards setting process is binding on a future holder of the patent.

National Semiconductor participated in an IEEE standards effort to develop the 100 Mbps "Fast Ethernet" specification in 1994. Two key (pending) patents were under their control, and they licensed them clearly, cleanly, and cheaply for US$1000 flat one-time fee to all takers. The patents changed hands, first to a group (2002) that wanted to change the licensing deal, then to N-Data (2003), a patent troll that was aggressively pursuing a changed expensive license.

Andy sums it up best:

"[T]he reliance upon promises made with respect to patents is of concern not only in the standard setting context, but with respect to open source software as well. The details of the settlement will provide significant guidance as to how the regulators would view similar conduct in an open source setting. Moreover, in the case of N-Data, the FTC has acted aggressively while acknowledging that the actions at issue might not rise to the level of violating relevant antitrust laws. In doing so, the Commissioners provide strong assurance to participants in standard setting that the FTC recognizes the importance of standards in the modern world. Finally, the details of the actual settlement demonstrate a willingness on the part of the FTC to craft a detailed and savvy set of requirements that addresses the realities of actual licensor-licensee conduct in the marketplace."

This is great news in the context of patent promises made to open source developers from the likes of IBM and Sun Microsystems, and through mechanisms like the Open Invention Network and the Linux Foundation's Patent Commons Project. It removes FUD slung around with respect to patents and intellectual property in both the standards arena and open source project communities. Each is a collaborative effort with significant economic importance and impact. Each will hopefully see the intellectual property landscape a little more clearly now.

Full details on Andy's blog.

Acacia Patents, Red Hat, and Novell

Groklaw reports a patent infringement suit has been launched against Red Hat and Novell over Linux.

Take a deep breath. Be calm.

When the SCO Group suit was first launched, I was still at Microsoft. A number of people in the strategy team where I worked were excited because "finally the free and open source world was going to understand the importance of intellectual property." (These Microsoft employees didn't appreciate exactly how careful the community is about IP.)

I pointed out the following logic back then: IBM was investing a billion dollars in Linux. IBM could therefore allow a certain amount of legal debate to occur to determine how real a case SCO Group may or may not have had. A few millions in legal fees pales in comparison. In an absolutely worst case scenario, IBM could acquire SCO Group for O(US$150M) or less after a couple of years of legal punishment and the problem would go away. Again, a few millions in legal fees would be a cheap exploration. The SCO Group suit was NEVER a threat to Linux growth and deployment. Did the FUD slow the adoption curve, no doubt. But did it make any material difference in the use and growth of Linux? Hardly. And it's over now.

Microsoft should itself understand this business calculus around IP. They offered a lot of money to settle the Eolas suit. Eolas got greedy and refused the settlement. They "won" a half billion dollars in court. Now, when you're about to pay out a half a billion dollars, you can afford to spend a few millions more contesting the decision. Indeed, with that sort of money at stake you can afford to hire the cream of the graduating classes of Harvard, Yale, and Stanford Law to spend some time getting creative.

The U.S. Supreme Court continues to involve itself in the broken patent system. The Linux Foundation and the Open Invention Network are both geared for this particular fight. I have confidence that the Groklaw community will step into the breach of reporting and investigation again. IBM, Intel, and HP have a vested interest in the outcome, and nobody plays IP games the way IBM does. Over the next few weeks, lawyers will come together behind the scenes from all the interested parties on the defending side. Hopefully egos won't be too large, and a coherent plan of negotiation will emerge.

Some of the more interesting questions for me will be:

• Why Red Hat AND Novell?
• Why not Microsoft? (Acacia went after Apple who settled. Microsoft would seem to have deeper pockets than Red Hat or Novell. It would seem to be the more interesting business discussion.)
• If Microsoft is not involved, should they be? If Apple settled, and then this suit settles, Microsoft should know they're next on the list. Or are they trusting IBM et al to win this one for them?

To quote one of my favourite lawyers in this space:

“If the F/OSS community wants to be in commercial space, community members will have to learn to deal calmly with IP litigation. The F/OSS production model will work where it makes sense, and it will not work where it doesn’t. It’s really just that simple. Particular claims in individual suits—even one against a flagship program such as the GNU/Linux OS—will not determine the fate of the community. Such cases present factual issues that will get resolved one way or another; they do not represent a crisis for F/OSS production as a whole. Norm entrepreneurial rhetoric that plays off such cases should be treated as entertainment. Enjoy it if you like it, take inspiration from it if you must, but don’t confuse it with the way things actually get done.”

I'm sure some former colleagues at Microsoft are excited. Mr. Smith and Mr. Ballmer most assuredly. But just as with the SCO Group litigation, there is no reason to celebrate. They shouldn't confuse this with "the way things actually get done." Pax.

SCO Group Finale!

Stephen Shankland says it all. 

Copyright ©  Despair, Inc.

Update (24-Sep-2007, 19:35):  A friend pointed this comic out.  I got into this battle while I worked at Microsoft and SCO Group first sued customers.  I pointed out it was a suicidal thing to do if they were a "real" company, and not the anti-VC (i.e. a company that acquires old technology and litigates money out of the marketplace.)  Vendors will occasionally sue customers in 1:1 situations e.g. a license dispute, in a similar way that customers occasionally sue vendors in one off disputes for non-performance, but a vendor NEVER sues customers over general things like IP infringement.  It sets a tone for all customers that is ... suicide.  Your top sales people will simply leave.  They know customers are now viewing business with the vendor as possibly tainted by lawsuits.

I also pointed out that IBM wasn't going to let anything bad happen.  A company investing a BILLION dollars in Linux could afford to weather even a few tens of millions of dollars of legal debate over several years while they determined how bad it may or may not really be.  Frustrating and distracting?  Certainly.  So what?  The customer is king. 

Ubuntu Live! (Day One)

It's 9 AM on SUNDAY morning and at this unconscionable hour I was sitting in a room with 200 people for Mark Shuttleworth's opening keynote at Ubuntu Live.  This three day event runs Sunday 22 July through Tuesday 24 July, and has been organized by Canonical and O'Reilly Media. 

Mark gave an excellent keynote (as he is prone to do), talking about the rise of Ubuntu over the past three years, and looking forward to the evolution of quality, engagements, and commerce over the next three years.  He acknowledged his partners at Dell, Sun, Intel and Open Moko, building on the themes that the time is now to demonstrate that open source has arrived beyond the data centre, and it's time to take Linux to a much broader audience. In doing so, however, he was NOT looking at Ubuntu as simply a better desktop, but rather enabling people beyond the desktop. 

As he pointed out with the Playstation 3, the future of computing does not necessarily look like a desktop and there are many interesting places where people "do computing".  There is no reason why a full platform couldn't be delivered on the PS3.  (I remember having this debate over the XBox inside Microsoft almost five years ago -- pointing out that they all ready had a Windows machine in the living room, it just needed a bigger disk and a wireless loop.) 

Stephen O'Grady (Redmonk) was the next keynote.  He built on the morning's keynote theme of collaboration, pointing out that apt-get is sufficient magic (per Clarke's Third Law on Predictions), and going on to explore the idea of distributed support.  Essentially connecting the community and the software would be like app-get for people (support) and not just software. 

Jeff Waugh provided the last keynote of the morning.  In his inimitable style, he gave a presentation on "Fierce Freedom" and "Fierce Commerce".  Jeff walked people through some of the learnings of the Ubuntu community that came from the Python, Gnome, and Debian community experiences. 

He then provided a historical perspective on technology and commercial innovations enabling social change, walking us through Gutenburg's innovations around movable type, the use of paper, and the development of the printing press, on through Luther's social changes, and onto the Tyndale translation of the Bible.  (There was a wonderful shot on Stephen O'Grady's behalf, suggesting Gentoo was the do-it-yourself Bible in the Linux world.) 

In the end he pointed out that software freedom is not just for geeks, and that we are the next translators.  ("Be the signal!")

The afternoon keynote's were kicked off with a great presentation by Eben Moglen.  He discussed his satisfaction and pride in the community in the development of the GPLv3, not because it's a better license, but in the demonstration of collaborative community development in an open and democratic process that transcended the entire free software community (corporate, academic, legal, and development). 

Mitch Kapor was next up.  He talked about his own evolution from proprietary developer in the mid-eighties to his belief in free and open source software development.  He then made a number of interesting observations about the social implications of open source.  Early developers at this point (early as in high school aged people) are living in open source worlds -- it is quite possible that the socialization of open sourcce will mean the next generation of developers will believe that this is the way it's always been.

Mitch pointed out that open source software has moved from margin to mainstream in a single human generation (~20 years).  Open source software is enormously empowering, especially to those in marginalized situations, and he built on the theme that it is also an amazing model for getting things done in a transparent and collaborative way.  Indeed, it is a form of democratic renewal that is so badly needed socially. 

Jim Zemlin (Linux Foundation) finished the afternoon's keynotes, outlining the mandate of the Linux Foundation and their commitment to helping the community. 

Heading to the Linux Foundation Collaboration Summit

I'm heading to Sunnyvale this afternoon to participate in the Linux Foundation Collaboration Summit at Google's Mt. View campus for the next few days.  I'll be staying at the Wild Palms.  I head home Friday evening out of San Jose.  By all means give me a shout if you're around.

Microsoft Advertising Windows Embedded on Google

I googled "microsoft xandros".
While I typically don't notice ads, I happened to notice the first sponsored link on the right side of the page:      

Linux Download
Customize your Operating System.
Learn more about Windows Embedded.
www.Microsoft.com

You end up on the Microsoft Windows Embedded page. 
The word "linux" appears nowhere on the page. 
Sort of wrong and funny all at the same time on multiple levels.

Innovation at Nokia: Thinking ahead with the Nokia 770

Mikko lent me his Nokia 770 Internet Tablet and I've started to explore the device.  Unfortunately we were in Beijing at the time, so I was missing the documentation and a cable, but that's only encouraged me to start to explore the related websites.  I discovered some of the applications work browsing from the tablet itself.  I found and loaded Gizmo, a VoIP client. I registered Gizmo and sitting at home on the home wifi network "dialed" the house ... and the phone rang.    

And then it hit me.  What if I'm holding the future in my hand?  The Nokia 770 is clearly Not-A-Mobile-Phone, but ....

• We're rapidly approaching a world of city-wide wifi networks and WiMax, and that assumes you don't already move through a mesh of wifi networks (paid and free) in your daily life.  While the mobile cell phone is the technology interface of choice in developing economies today, it's already changing in the developed economies and urban centers.
• The news around the announcement of Apple's coming iPhone pointed out that all the handset manufacturers were probably excited because they may finally be able to break the tyranny of the network mobile operators (NMO) once Apple demonstrates people will pay for device appeal.  But what if we didn't care about the NMO anymore?
• It's a Linux device.  So Nokia has already dodged the bullet of per device royalties from Symbian and/or Microsoft.  (Symbian and Microsoft still think they'll make money with "smart phones" in China.  They're both doing the wrong arithmetic.)
• It's Wifi.  So specific national and regional comms stack requirements from the government via the NMO, supported through the device OS vendor, are also gone. (Really ... what if we didn't care about the NMO anymore?)
• Screen real estate is awesome compared to any cell phone or Blackberry I've seen.  I can read email and PDFs here.  I can browse the web here.  The work Google did for the Gmail mobile browser is hugely helpful when I'm stuck with ONLY my phone, but reading "full" Gmail on the Nokia 770 screen is much much much better than my Motorola Razr.  (Just need to figure out how to turn javascript on.) 
• I can't imagine why anyone wants to read Word docs through a 5cm by 4cm viewer on a mobile phone, but here I can imagine a simplified ODF viewer.  Or Google docs.  (I must find that javascript enablement on the browser.)
• Input methods easily span the stylus, handwriting recognition, and a finger appropriate touch pad.  I'm still becoming proficient in all three, but I also think I like all three in different application settings. 
• Google's laying down city wide wifi.  Forget the Google phone, Google should be pounding down Nokia's door to work on the Nokia tablet series together.  At the very least, Google's apps teams should show up en masse in the maemo community. 

Nokia has even gone out of its way to attract developers.  They've published the platform as open source.  Aside from the Linux platform base, they're building out an applications development community as well.  While the home page is stark, and I've barely begun to scratch the surface, there's a wealth of material here.  I knew Nokia was already experimenting with open source software communities around MUPE.  Here they're raising the bar. 

I do not begrudge Apple from locking out app developers initially from the iPhone, because their internal cult-of-customer-design makes me a happy customer on my PowerBook, iPod, etc.  But they're still thinking about how to turn a small computer with great screen appeal into a phone, and managing the entire customer experience.  Nokia is being brilliant and throwing open the doors on a tablet device that isn't a mobile phone.  But from which I can make calls ....

www.flickr.com

And then I started thinking again ....

Apple and Microsoft are gearing up for the Living Room Wars as the ultimate media experience.  They're each staking turf as the real "set top box" which we've heard promised for a decade.  They're each approaching it as a PC company -- so the set top box must be a PC.  They're each doing business with the music labels and Hollywood, so they think like media channel partners.  I trust Apple to get the user experience "right".  (Windows OS security pop-ups during movies notwithstanding, the Mac media UI is just easier.) 

But Nokia core competencies don't just involve small hand held devices.  They do have some experience in "bigger" equipment.  What if the home network hub was a device near the front door on which I drop my keys, [ultra small and cheap] mobile phone [which is just a camera/phone], and tablet at the end of the day and it:

• syncs the phone and tablet (if indeed they don't actively live in sync via bluetooth),
• syncs the phone and tablet contacts,
• checks for tablet email and routes it appropriately (possibly uploading and sending the tablet off-line outbox),
• syncs any documents I updated,
• uploads the next TiVo episode for watching on tomorrow's commute [or at lunch] because I really don't need yet another US$400-$800 dollar device in my living room,
• ... <what would YOU like it to do> ...

Oh, and inductive charges the two active devices. 

This is actually a second game changing innovation opportunity they could develop, beyond the idea that "the mobile phone company" is developing mobile devices that make mobile phones irrelevant.    Let Microsoft and Apple hammer away at each other over media centers, phones, and hand-held media players. 

Now I just need to figure out how to get the Nokia 770 to talk to my Mac to get some real file sharing going on.  Then I'll think about my killer app ....

Ian Murdock Joins Sun

Ian Murdock announced yesterday that he has joined Sun Microsystems as Chief Operating Platforms Officer.  Ian describes his move on his blog.  Stephen O'Grady at Redmonk has a good commentary and summary of other blog commentary. 

This is a great move for Sun, the Linux Foundation, and Ian. 

For Sun:
Sun (as most UNIX OEMs through the 1990s) invested heavily in ISV relationships.  Sun was hit hard by the Bubble bursting.  Linux was cheap "UNIX" in the eyes of many customers, bought out of their PC hardware catalog as it were.    Gravity shifted for the ISVs away from Sun and over to the dominant Linux vendors through the excellent efforts of the Free Standards Group and others.  As Sun begins to reassert itself as a cool computing platform again, they need to re-engage with ISVs (both new and old alike).  Having Ian on board with his background in Linux binary compatibility opens up new opportunities for new discussions with those ISVs.  This doesn't mean that this is the strategy, just that it opens possibilities that wouldn't otherwise exist without the relationships and history that comes with Ian.

The Linux Foundation:
First, while they're losing a CTO, they're gaining a strong champion in a vendor that is on the rise again and has long supported UNIX standardization, and will remain LSB chair.   

Second, everyone always wants to understand why Red Hat plays so coy with the LSB.  As the dominant Linux vendor, the last positioning they want is "we're just like everyone else."  Solaris on Intel opens interesting new opportunities for Sun customers looking to transition to new less expensive hardware.  They didn't want rewrite costs to Windows (their backlog is growing not shrinking so re-writes are uninteresting) and were considering Linux.  Red Hat has interesting competition again.  If Sun starts to play well with the LSB, Red Hat will participate more.  They can ignore Novell et al.  It would be dangerous for them to ignore Sun the same way. 

For Ian:
Read his blog entry.  He's clearly excited.  Sun lost its cool for a while.  It's great to see it getting its game back.  While both Microsoft and Red Hat may scoff for various reasons, and wave market share numbers around as "proof" of its insignificance, what neither of them realize (or possibly want to admit) is it's about profitability and installed base, and not market share.  Sun is becoming cool again and Ian's in an awesome position to help it.

Congratulations!

Novell's Link to the Microsoft TCO Linux Message

Last week, Novell got caught in a press release with Microsoft in which an HSBC IT operations manager makes appropriate noises about TCO of Windows over Linux per the Microsoft messaging of the past 5 years.  This is too bad really.  It emphasizes the points Brent Williams made in his presentation with respect to Novell:

• Novell thinks the problem is catching Red Hat: They need to formulate a brand identity for SuSE other than "We're not Red Hat." (slide 14)
• Shows that even Novell believes it can't stop Red Hat alone. (slide 15)

Here's a slightly different way to look at the messaging:

Red Hat began messaging at least a year ago around the use of Red Hat linux in value creation.  Here's how the logic flows from a Michael Tiemann presentation at the 2006 Red Hat Summit:

• Companies spend on average 4-8% of income on IT (Financial companies 8-12%)
• So regardless of how you carve up the cost savings, you're messing around with something that will NOT move the stock price anytime soon.
• IT focusing on the value creation side of the bar can help by delivering better customer service (and retention), market growth, competitive advantage. 

This is actually backed up nicely by studies over the past couple of years around ROI and TCO, where executives are more interested in the ability of IT to improve customer satisfaction and business information access than ROI, and recognize that they can't measure TCO particularly well. 

So to bring it all home for Novell readers:  If you were a billion dollar financial services company, you're arguing over saving the customer some money on a $100M IT budget, BUT the sort of money you're really talking about is 10% (according to old IDC Windows vs. Linux numbers) over several years for particular workloads, so $10M, and the reality is it's smaller than that because they're running a heterogeneous environment and aren't about to swap it all out soon.  And that assumes you can accurately measure the cost savings.

Red Hat is pitching value creation on the other $900M in revenues.  Moving the ball by 10% there (i.e. $90M) is a whole lot more interesting than 10% on the cost side.  As the CIO, do you want to help save a bit of money, or grow the business?  Which one moves the stock?  Which one makes you a hero and grows your bonus? 

The message is all about the customer as hero.