backtop


Print 16 comment(s) - last by akosixiv.. on Mar 22 at 4:13 PM


Microsoft says TomTom infringed on 8 of its patents in technology found in TomTom's Linux-based GPS units. TomTom, backed by a riled open-source community, responded back this week, suing Microsoft for triple the amount, for alleged willful infringement of four of its patents.  (Source: Ubergizmo)
Microsoft initiates war with major open-source player TomTom, riles open-source community

Late last month Microsoft took a stick to a hornets’ nest when it announced that it was suing for alleged copyright infringement by TomTom International BV, a major player in the open source business community and maker of Linux-based GPS devices.  In total, it says that TomTom infringed on 8 GPS-based patents it holds. 

Horacio Gutierrez, Microsoft's corporate vice president and deputy general counsel of intellectual property and licensing insists that the lawsuit isn't an attack on open source.  He states, "(While) three of the infringed patents implicate open-source code ... open-source software is not the focal point of this action."

Still many in the open-source community perceived it as one of several recent signs that Microsoft is trying to take down Linux and the open-source movement.  States Andrew Updegrove, a partner at Boston law firm Gesmer Updegrove LLP, "I've received e-mail in the past from people that Microsoft has approached, alleging Linux infringement and saying 'You better get a license from us, or else.'"

The move puzzled Mr. Updegrove, who points out, "(It) doesn't make sense to me, because I can't think of any reason why they should move now and several reasons why they should not: the European Union is still on their tail regarding browsers (and Google just joined in against them), and there's a new administration in town in Washington -- why test them at this point in time, rather than lie low and watch for awhile and see whether antitrust enforcement is back in town?"

Many in the open-source community have spoken up and said that if Microsoft wants a fight, it will have one.  The open-source community owns a great deal of IP and has strong cases to prior art on many other commonly used software concepts and hardware devices.

TomTom itself is looking to lead the charge to beat back the latest round of Microsoft aggression. Early this week, it filed a countersuit against Microsoft.  The countersuit accuses Microsoft's Streets and Trips software of infringing on four TomTom patents.  The Microsoft software runs a computer program with maps, which can connect to a small GPS receiver -- technology which TomTom holds patents on.

In retaliation to Microsoft's legal first-strike, TomTom is taking its suit a step further, accusing Microsoft of willful infringement, saying it had previously asked Microsoft to desist and was met with refusal.  It is seeking three times the normal damages as a result.

Microsoft appears to be backing off a bit from the hornets' nest its riled, as a Microsoft spokesman issued a statement that it is reviewing the TomTom filing and is (and has been) committed to licensing TomTom's IP.  However, the statement may just be an effort to try to provide Microsoft's perspective in lieu of a prospective court battle.

TomTom's suit is ongoing in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, while Microsoft filed its suit in the District Court for the Western District of Washington, an area where it has many close connections.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Not an attack on open source
By jodhas on 3/20/2009 1:19:29 PM , Rating: 4
From this artice, it doesn't appear to be an attack on open source community. I think the "community" as a whole is taking this too sensitively.

If I am suing a Nike Golf, does that mean its an attack on ALL golfers?




RE: Not an attack on open source
By ReligiousScience on 3/20/2009 1:28:41 PM , Rating: 2
I think it's a ridiculous exaggeration myself. I believe open source carries its own momentum and does not have to directly compete with closed source. OSS was around before Microsoft existed, so perceiving this as an attack on the open-source community is laughable.


RE: Not an attack on open source
By JasonMick (blog) on 3/20/2009 1:32:36 PM , Rating: 2
Even if it was an "attack on open source" as some are saying, IMO it *still* wouldn't be that big a deal as Microsoft's jabs at the open source community in the past have been half-hearted at best.

Microsoft can't kill open source, I'm sure its execs realize that. It has too much IP working against it and faces too much fallout in terms of reputation if it tried.

Still, you can count on the open source community becoming at-arms and all worked up whenever Microsoft comes knocking at their door.


RE: Not an attack on open source
By ReligiousScience on 3/20/2009 1:47:45 PM , Rating: 2
The 2 quotes in the article that kind of have me s crating my head both start with "many in the open source community...". I'm wondering how much of that is exaggeration. Obviously Microsoft isn't a threat to the open-source movement or Linux in general, and it already faces possible collateral damage due to the counter suits. The OSS community has no choice but to fight fire with fire, a lawsuit for a lawsuit. Are they really all that riled up, or just responding in the only way they can?


RE: Not an attack on open source
By JasonMick (blog) on 3/20/09, Rating: 0
RE: Not an attack on open source
By smitty3268 on 3/21/2009 12:02:01 AM , Rating: 2
I think it's worth mentioning exactly which patent has people so riled up. It's the FAT filesystem. The feeling is that if MS is going to sue on that, then the linux OS will need to stop supporting it, which will basically stop linux from being able to support any usb pendrives, which would make linux pretty useless to a large portion of computer users. Linux users could use one of their own filesystems of course (they have many which are much better) but the whole point of using FAT is that it's compatible between all the different computers you can take it to. Certainly no one commercially would use anything not supported by windows.

Of course, i think that whole scenario is pretty far-fetched, because i don't think MS would want the attention that would bring. My feeling is that they feel like commercial companies should pay for using FAT and wanted to do this quietly behind closed doors. Now that it's become so public and TomTom has countersued, I expect they will quickly do a cross-licensing agreement to keep anything from going to court.


RE: Not an attack on open source
By BZDTemp on 3/20/2009 8:27:26 PM , Rating: 2
I think you are very wrong. More and more organizations are looking to cut cost and what Microsoft is trying is to make open source look risky.

Just consider how many that have stayed with Win 2000/XP or perhaps even NT and avoiding to pay their Microsoft "tax". Those organizations are under increasing pressure to upgrade and in the current economic climate looking at Linux is more relevant than ever. Microsoft is loosing market shares and they are scared a snowball effect is really starting to roll.

If Microsoft was not trying to stop Linux they why have they thrown money at SCO (just google SCO Microsoft)?

Remember open source is not just about Linux. For every user that switches it's one less possible sale of Microsoft Office and there is also the server side. If you run Linux you don't want Sharepoint (since it needs IE), IIS, Exchange... so you don't need Windows Server.

Open source = choice. Microsoft does not want choice - they NEED buying Windows, Office and so on to be a given.


RE: Not an attack on open source
By Staples on 3/20/2009 6:07:06 PM , Rating: 4
A lot of open source geeks are pretty extremist. Their number one target is Microsoft (and every other software company who *gasps* sells software). This story is not surprising at all.


RE: Not an attack on open source
By akosixiv on 3/22/2009 4:13:25 PM , Rating: 2
A lot of OSS people are just waiting for a chance to speak up against microsoft for whatever reason they may have.

Now that microsoft has taken a step they know can be countered. Most are jumping on the bandwagon just to have a chance to bash microsoft.


RE: Not an attack on open source
By chaos386 on 3/20/2009 3:33:13 PM , Rating: 2
I think the open source community's claim is that Microsoft is doing this to discourage manufacturers from using open source software in their products.


Microsoft
By Joz on 3/20/2009 1:13:19 PM , Rating: 1
Microsoft can do whatever the hell it wants, I don't care, as long as it[microsoft] gives me a few million dollars to not give a damn.

I need a GPS >_<




RE: Microsoft
By dragonbif on 3/20/2009 1:16:21 PM , Rating: 2
It is not the best idea to sell open sorce anything. It just opens yourself up to this stuff. I hope Tom Tom didnt get its software on the net because it was free ~


By PhatoseAlpha on 3/22/2009 2:28:18 AM , Rating: 2
This would be much more surprising if Open Source Advocate wasn't a synonym for rabid anti-microsoft ideologue.




hmm
By mfed3 on 3/20/09, Rating: -1
RE: hmm
By ReligiousScience on 3/20/2009 1:34:52 PM , Rating: 3
I see it going both ways. In my daily linux use I find programs the mimic the functionality of certain Windows or Mac software. On the other hand, I have seen at least a few improvements in Windows recently that have been around in *nix for ages. Considering Microsoft obviously pays attention to OSS development, and its nature to provide source to anyone who wants it, how do you know for sure who's stealing more ideas from who?


RE: hmm
By Bruneauinfo on 3/20/2009 7:31:55 PM , Rating: 1
OO.org is originally licensed through Sun.


"I'd be pissed too, but you didn't have to go all Minority Report on his ass!" -- Jon Stewart on police raiding Gizmodo editor Jason Chen's home














botimage
Copyright 2012 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki