MS keynote/panel
March 25th, 2008 by Hen90 min or so of Brad Smith and panel [Shuttleworth, Bottomley, Updegrove], mostly about the recent patent promise and the various patents alleged to be directed at Linux (or was it Open Source?).
Question from the audience - why charge businesses a ’small fee’?
It’s the obvious dodge point and answers were relatively unfulfilling. Personally - I think it’s so they still have them for cross-patent negotiations. I’ve not seen anything saying everyone gets the same small fee. [UPDATE: I’m told they’ve talked about doing RAND, which would mean everyone gets the same fee]
Next question - you’re getting involved in Eclipse now, would you use EPL?
Again relatively unfulfilling - they’d probably consider it some day. This is a standard answer in reality - you use the license of the community. So MS Eclipse plugins - I bet they’d be under EPL.
Next question - a pretty loaded one complaining that the leaders MS are talking to big companies, not open source. Fair enough - though I’m quite happy with the three people up there talking to Brad (Ubuntu founder, Linux guy (I think involved with the Linux Foundation) and a standards lawyer). Not very answerable.
Next up - “what’s the furthest compromise you’ll make”. Whee. Not answerable at all.
Next - Bill Gates said OS was Communism. Steve Ballmer said it was a cancer. When did this change? My understanding of the explanation is the obvious one - the world changes.
Financial Analyst asks why charge for the patents if not much money. Brad explained again that they think it is a necessary model.
Second question from the analyst is whether you’d keep supporting the open infrastructure at Yahoo. Brad points out he can’t answer that due to securities and wossnames.
Question from the front - can we create a model whereby a kid in a garage can make the new Windows without being afraid of being sued to death.
Brad answered interestingly here. Early on MS looked to copyright, but in the 90s the courts in the US said look to patents not copyrights. I can’t quote his exact phrases, I should carry a tape recorder eh? But he explained that that was not ideal.
Whee. Question for everyone else on the panel. Can MS ride both OS and proprietary wave. Everyone says yes. Mark explained that moving to services means copyright/patent less important, and he expects MS to figure that out. James pointed out that there is a standard invitation to all to be involved in OS, including MS. Andy predicted a flip where ‘those out there’ were more dominant than ‘those at MS’ and that MS should get involved sooner rather than later.
Matt Asay (host) asked: “Why MS? Why not Oracle, IBM etc. ” He thinks not because they have the most to lose, but the most to gain.
Recording that without misquoting Brad would be hard - he explained how he’s proud they have the courage of their convictions, and pride that they’re listening.
Overall - panel went quite well.