http://blogs.technet.com/b/microsoft_on_the_issues/archive/2009/07/22/collaboration-competition-and-ip-in-the-real-world.aspxPosted by Horacio Gutierrez Corporate Vice President and Deputy General Counsel In the last few days Microsoft has made a number of announcements that reflect the pragmatic approach the company takes on intellectual property rights and open sourceen-USTelligent Evolution Platform Developer Build (Build: 5.6.50428.7875)http://blogs.technet.com/b/microsoft_on_the_issues/archive/2009/07/22/collaboration-competition-and-ip-in-the-real-world.aspx#3343144Fri, 09 Jul 2010 18:00:30 GMTd5e57398-b9ef-4490-9955-07cbb4e4a80d:3343144Anonymous<p>No one in the Open Source community claims Microsoft doesn&#39;t deserve to be compensated for their IP, however whenever Microsoft is asked by the Open Source community what the alleged IP violations are silence is the only reply. &nbsp; &nbsp;Until Microsoft is prepared to publicly identify what the alleged IP infringements actually are, all we can do is take with a grain of salt any statements from Microsoft in regards their IP. &nbsp; &nbsp;The 20,000 lines of GPL&#39;d code are nice, thank you very much, but lets keep it in perspective, that code directly benefits primarily Microsoft, not the Linux community as a whole, there is nothing altruistic about it. &nbsp; &nbsp;So how about it Mr.Gutierrez, identify all the supposed IP infringements or are the supposed infringements unable to stand up to real public scrutiny? </p> <div style="clear:both;"></div><img src="http://blogs.technet.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=3343144" width="1" height="1">http://blogs.technet.com/b/microsoft_on_the_issues/archive/2009/07/22/collaboration-competition-and-ip-in-the-real-world.aspx#3343142Fri, 09 Jul 2010 17:59:14 GMTd5e57398-b9ef-4490-9955-07cbb4e4a80d:3343142Anonymous<p>I think Microsoft would benefit immensely from open sourcing some of its software. A mixed model of development similar to what Apple does with Safari (Webkit) and Google with Chrome(Chromium, Webkit) would help Microsoft lower costs and shorten development time. I understand Microsoft believes strongly in IP but that doesn&#39;t mean it should not support open source software. Also improving linux compatibility with its products would open a whole new market for Microsoft in enterprises that are leveraging open source and proprietary software. (e.g. For what I understand Microsoft has been working with the community on improving MS SQL support for PHP)</p> <div style="clear:both;"></div><img src="http://blogs.technet.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=3343142" width="1" height="1">http://blogs.technet.com/b/microsoft_on_the_issues/archive/2009/07/22/collaboration-competition-and-ip-in-the-real-world.aspx#3343141Fri, 09 Jul 2010 17:58:25 GMTd5e57398-b9ef-4490-9955-07cbb4e4a80d:3343141Anonymous<p>1. Yes, I agree that contributing to open source in projects where there is mutual benefit to Microsoft and the users is good. There is no doubt about it. And more open source software should be contributed by Microsoft, especially in areas where there is no or little commercial value and where users can create a much better product through a community than Microsoft has the money and time for. For example, the recently announced .NET Microframework open sourcing and perhaps if you wanted in the future why not, Windows CE as well. The licensing dollars from say Windows CE are not perhaps worth it, compared to the lack of adoption of CE due to its closed nature. Also, many Windows technologies could have been improved much faster if they were open source. Technologies which are not core to Windows but are there as complementary. Therefore, more open source involvement should be expected and would be benefitial to Microsoft, especially regarding its relationships to academia where currently Microsoft is not viewed very favorably. &nbsp;2. Yes, I agree that Microsoft has to be paid for their innovations and their patents. Yes, I agree that not everything in this world can be free and that Microsoft should be rewarded for their work. &nbsp;3. However, I disagree with the substance of some of your demands. I have read, for example, the patents you had aledged that Tom-Tom had violated and they appeared simplistic, invalid and outright bogus to me. Yes, you have to be rewarded for your hard work, not for some patent which could have been thought by anyone. Also, I disagree with the use of patents in technologies which are aimed to improve the lives of millions of people. You cannot, for example, place patents on your Windows Media Codecs and then expect everyone to adopt them on the Web. I think that in some cases like say the Windows Media case, even company interests are best served by not burdening such widely used and relied upon technology with patents, because then nobody would want to bet their future on such technology. I believe, therefore, that in some cases you should think more long term and not short-sighted and allow everyone to benefit from your hard work, if the costs to you are not too much and if the monetary benefits are not significant anyway. Finally, you also agree that the patent system needs reform and it is time that a discussion on such reform should be undertaken by your company. &nbsp;</p> <div style="clear:both;"></div><img src="http://blogs.technet.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=3343141" width="1" height="1">http://blogs.technet.com/b/microsoft_on_the_issues/archive/2009/07/22/collaboration-competition-and-ip-in-the-real-world.aspx#3343139Fri, 09 Jul 2010 17:48:14 GMTd5e57398-b9ef-4490-9955-07cbb4e4a80d:3343139Anonymous<p>It is interesting to see Microsoft collaborating with the open source community but I find it difficult to conclude that Buffalo paying royalties to Microsoft for a Linux based router supports this conclusion when the details of the agreement have not been disclosed.</p> <div style="clear:both;"></div><img src="http://blogs.technet.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=3343139" width="1" height="1">