Open Source Blog

"Because that source code is under Microsoft copyright, developers who have seen the source code cannot re-implement it in free software for fear of copyright violation."

FSFE lawyer Carlo Piana explains why Microsoft licensing its Windows source code to competitors as a part of its program to meet the European Commission's interoperability remedies does not necessarily help open source competitors.

"The Linux kernel is under the GPL version 2. Not anything else. Some individual files are licensable under v3, but not the kernel in general. And quite frankly, I don't see that changing.”

Linux creator, Linux Torvalds rules out moving the Linux kernel to the forthcoming GPLv3.

“We're looking at how to reach developers and customers who prefer the GPL… we want to do what we can to drive more efficiency and cross-pollination between Linux and OpenSolaris.”

While Sun’s then-COO, and now CEO, Jonathan Schwartz, indicates that Sun is more keen.

“Also, know that Google getting into the Red Hat business would be kind of dumb, and it would distract from our moon teleporter and cold fusion projects.”

Chris DiBona, Google's open source program manager, dismisses speculation that the company is working on its own Linux distribution.

“We wrote the software. That's the only part I care about, and perhaps (at least to me) more importantly, because it's the only part we created, it's the only part that I feel we have a moral right to control.”

Linux Torvalds, once again, on GPLv3.

“No versions, files or lines of Unix System V code are identified; no versions, files or lines of Dynix or AIX code are identified as misused; and no specific versions or lines of Linux code are identified. For these 201 items, SCO comes nowhere near close to providing the information that IBM needs to defend itself and that the Court ordered SCO to provide."

IBM tells the court hearing its defense against SCO that “enough is enough” and most of SCO’s claimed evidence should be thrown out.

"We are moving aggressively into open source. We're embracing it, we're not going to fight this trend. We think if we're clever we can make it work to our advantage."

Oracle CEO Larry Ellison sets his sights on open source following Oracle’s acquisition of Sleepycat.

"There has been so much waste dumping going on lately that we may very well need an 'Open Source landfill' to deal with the cleanup of all of this waste and its damage to our environment."

Marc Fleury, then CEO of JBoss, tells proprietary vendors to stop dumping their unwanted code into open source.

"If Mozilla permit the sale of copied versions of its software, it makes it virtually impossible for us, from a practical point of view, to enforce UK anti-piracy legislation, as it is difficult for us to give general advice to businesses over what is/is not permitted."

The UK’s Trading Standards Organisation gets confused about the implications of open source licensing.

"Red Hat didn't make Linux: IBM made Linux, Intel made Linux, Oracle made Linux. Open source becomes successful when major industrial corporations invest heavily in that open source product."

Larry Ellison, seems to think that Linux began with IBM's decision to invest in the technology.

"Its true that joining with a company to commercialise Nagios *could* be beneficial to future development, but I'd be willing to bet that in 99% of all such scenarios there would be more problems than anything created by such a move.”

Ethan Galstad, founder of the Nagios host and service monitor project insists that not everyone is interested in commercializing open source.

“The GPL encourages, rather than discourages, free competition and the distribution of computer operating systems, the benefits of which directly pass to consumers. These benefits include lower prices, better access and more innovation."

US District Judge John Daniel Tinder, dismisses claims that the GPL is in violation of the Sherman Act and the Free Software Foundation is guilty of price fixing.

"Why is it good to open source OpenSolaris and OpenOffice and bad to open source Java?"

ActiveGrid founder and CEO, Peter Yared, asks the question that Sun would eventually find it impossible to answer.

“So, all things considered I'd plump for Novell if I had to guess which of these two [Red Hat and Novell] would make the move for JBoss, but then I picked the Grand National winner but I didn't bother placing a bet.”

My first and last prediction in this blog, made just hours before Red Hat announced it was to acquire JBoss.

"We're missing an operating system. You could argue that it makes a lot of sense for us to look at distributing and supporting Linux, it makes a lot of sense. That's the one area where Oracle isn't a player."

Larry Ellison, who else, sparks mass speculation about Oracle buying its way into Linux, but explains why he would not acquire Red Hat or Novell.

"The open source model is not like traditional enterprise software RFPs. The beauty of this model is that it's driven by self-selection. It flows frictionlessly and takes BI into places where is hasn't gone before."

JasperSoft CEO, Paul Doscher, neatly explains how giving open source software away for free can generate services revenue opportunities.

"If and when this thing takes off, we'll be there and we'll be very proactive."

Richard Carriere, general manager of office productivity with Corel, describes how the company will be proactive in delivering support for ODF when customers demand it, but not before.

“In terms of executing that, there's one less box I have to check now. I can go a little faster.”

Novell’s new CEO, Ron Hovsepian explains how the removal of Jack Messman will help him drive through his improvement plans.

"Some companies may not like the fact that Red Hat declared independence by buying JBoss. But it was bound to happen and everybody is going to have to live with it."

Marc Fleury maintains that Oracle will have to like it or lump it despite missing out on the potential acquisition of JBoss.

"Microsoft wished to promote SCO and its pending lawsuit about IBM and the Linux operating system. But Microsoft did not want to be seen as attacking IBM or Linux. For that reason, Microsoft wanted to further its interest through independent investors like BayStar."

BayStar managing general partner, Larry Goldfarb indicates that Microsoft had more to do with SCO’s lawsuits than it had previously let on.

“We are not going to say ‘take Linux because it is a safe bet’ we are going to say ‘take Linux because it is the best bet’.”

Novell’s VP of worldwide sales, Tom Francese, insists the company will not use its patent peace deal with Microsoft to spread FUD about rival offerings.

“It's worse than useless. Don't be confused by the illusion of a truce; developers are no safer from Microsoft patents now than they were before.”

Bradley Kuhn, SFLC CTO, dismisses Microsoft’s offer not to sue open source developers as long as they don’t get paid for their development work.

“While the idea was solid, the execution seems to have missed the mark a bit.”

Microsoft’s director of standards, Jason Matusow, admits that aspect of the deal needs some work.

“We've had an issue, a problem that we've had to confront, which is because of the way the GPL works, and because open-source Linux does not come from a company - Linux comes from the community - the fact that that product uses our patented intellectual property is a problem for our shareholders."

Steve Ballmer lays the FUD on thick and fast.

“In a sense you could say anybody who has got Linux in their data center today sort of has an undisclosed balance sheet liability, because it's not just Microsoft patents."

And thicker and faster.