81 lines
2.3 KiB
HTML
81 lines
2.3 KiB
HTML
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
|
|
|
|
<html newsdate="2011-04-12">
|
|
<version>1</version>
|
|
|
|
<head>
|
|
<title>
|
|
Novell's patent sale: FSFE's input to competition authorities
|
|
</title>
|
|
</head>
|
|
<body>
|
|
|
|
<h1>
|
|
Novell's patent sale: FSFE's input to competion authorities
|
|
</h1>
|
|
|
|
<p>
|
|
On April 6, FSFE provided the German competition authorities with its
|
|
<a href="/activities/swpat/letter-20110406.html">views
|
|
on the sale of Novell's patents</a> to CPTN, a joint venture of
|
|
Microsoft, Apple, EMC and Oracle. According to the German authorities,
|
|
the terms of the sale have been slightly modified since
|
|
we <a href="/activities/swpat/letter-20101222.html">registered
|
|
our concerns</a> with them on December 22, 2010.<br/>
|
|
|
|
Despite these modifications, the transfer of a substantial number of
|
|
patents to firms with a history of using them against Free Software
|
|
remains a worrying prospect. Both documents are available on our
|
|
<a href="/activities/swpat/novell-cptn.html">overview
|
|
page</a> for the case.
|
|
</p>
|
|
|
|
<p>
|
|
In our reply , we make clear that this modification does not allay our
|
|
concerns that Novell's patents may be used to limit competition. There
|
|
are several reasons to be worried, notably:
|
|
|
|
<ul>
|
|
<li>
|
|
access to more patents will increase the respective dominant
|
|
positions of the CPTN investors;
|
|
</li>
|
|
<li>
|
|
What will Attachmate do with those patents? The company does not
|
|
have an established track record in Free Software, and there is
|
|
nothing to keep Attachmate from either selling the patents on to a
|
|
third party, or trying to turn litigation into a revenue
|
|
driver. Could Attachmate become a second SCO?
|
|
</li>
|
|
<li>
|
|
Any financial relationship between Attachmate and Microsoft needs
|
|
to be clarified.
|
|
</li>
|
|
</ul>
|
|
</p>
|
|
|
|
|
|
<p>
|
|
As a remedy, we propose that the Novell patents which CPTN is seeking
|
|
to acquire should be made available under conditions that allow
|
|
implementation in Free Software, including under the GPL. This would
|
|
be a royalty-free, perpetual license. Their owners could still enforce
|
|
the patents against proprietary implementations. But there would be no
|
|
further danger that they would be used to limit competition from Free
|
|
Software.
|
|
</p>
|
|
|
|
|
|
</body>
|
|
<tags>
|
|
<tag key="front-page"/>
|
|
</tags>
|
|
|
|
|
|
</html>
|
|
<!--
|
|
Local Variables: ***
|
|
mode: xml ***
|
|
End: ***
|
|
-->
|