[Cialug] So who didn't see this one coming?

[Brandon Griffis]

Back then Netware was the only way to really do network shared drives for
windows clients that was relatively stable.  Netware was pretty good, but
Novell thought it was the perfect product and they could charge anything for
it.  Which is why they ended up with no money the first time.

Copied snippet from an email of mine on another list:

By taking this cash they're arguably admiting that their customers need
"protection" from IP suits from Microsoft.  This translates to being aware
of IP infringements.  As a Linux distributor SuSE is bound by the GPL.  If
they know of IP infringing software in the system and haven't moved to
report/change it they are in violation of section 7 of the GPL and are not
permited to redistribute Linux.  Any way this goes it ends bad for
Novell/SuSE.

On 11/17/06, carl-olsen at mchsi.com <carl-olsen at mchsi.com> wrote:
>
> I remember when NetWare was very popular and Microsoft and Novell were
> doing a lot of integration.  There seems to be some kind of historic
> relationship between these two.  I don't know much except I remember NetWare
> was big when I first started using Windows and it ran on a lot of Windows
> operating systems.
>
>  -------------- Original message ----------------------
> From: "Brandon Griffis" <brandongriffis at gmail.com>
> > I doubt they're going after any projects.  In everything I've read from
> > Balmer he's not once used the word patient or copyright, it's always
> "IP".
> > I think we're just talking about FUD threats.  The problem is that
> Novell
> > has lent those threats credibility by making this deal.
> >
> > -G
> >
> > On 11/17/06, Tony Jeffries <ajeffri at loopysite.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Fri, November 17, 2006 10:24, Daniel.Juliano at wellsfargo.com wrote:
> > > <snip>
> > > > My concern is Microsoft might never attack property in The Kernel
> (tm),
> > > > as wayyy too many companies are involved in it's development, but it
> > > > would be relatively easy to attack some of the key applications that
> > > > make running linux worthwhile.
> > >
> > > My thought is that, as someone else said, they're going after Samba,
> or
> > > that they're going after OpenOffice.
> > >
> > > Those are the two I'm concerned about.
> > >
> > > --
> > > Tony Jeffries
> > > ajeffri at loopysite.org
> > > n0nro at arrl.net
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Cialug mailing list
> > > Cialug at cialug.org
> > > http://cialug.org/mailman/listinfo/cialug
> > >
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: "Brandon Griffis" <brandongriffis at gmail.com>
> To: "Central Iowa Linux Users Group" <cialug at cialug.org>
> Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2006 17:42:24 +0000
> Subject: Re: [Cialug] So who didn't see this one coming?
> I doubt they're going after any projects.  In everything I've read from
> Balmer he's not once used the word patient or copyright, it's always "IP".
> I think we're just talking about FUD threats.  The problem is that Novell
> has lent those threats credibility by making this deal.
>
> -G
>
> On 11/17/06, Tony Jeffries <ajeffri at loopysite.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, November 17, 2006 10:24, Daniel.Juliano at wellsfargo.com wrote:
> > <snip>
> > > My concern is Microsoft might never attack property in The Kernel
> > (tm),
> > > as wayyy too many companies are involved in it's development, but it
> > > would be relatively easy to attack some of the key applications that
> > > make running linux worthwhile.
> >
> > My thought is that, as someone else said, they're going after Samba, or
> > that they're going after OpenOffice.
> >
> > Those are the two I'm concerned about.
> >
> > --
> > Tony Jeffries
> > ajeffri at loopysite.org
> > n0nro at arrl.net
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Cialug mailing list
> > Cialug at cialug.org
> > http://cialug.org/mailman/listinfo/cialug
> >
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Cialug mailing list
> Cialug at cialug.org
> http://cialug.org/mailman/listinfo/cialug
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Cialug mailing list
> Cialug at cialug.org
> http://cialug.org/mailman/listinfo/cialug
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://cialug.org/pipermail/cialug/attachments/20061117/9474e691/attachment.htm