main

Novell offers legal protection for Linux

malebolgia   on 13 January 2004 - 04:33 · 13 comments & 1265 views

Advertisement (Why?)
Novell expects this week to begin offering SuSE Linux customers some legal protection for using the open-source operating system, the fourth legal umbrella to emerge from a computing industry grappling with legal threats brought by SCO Group.

Novell plans to offer the legal indemnification once its $210 million acquisition of SuSE is complete, which should take place Monday, said Novell Chief Executive Jack Messman. A $50 million investment from IBM isn't yet complete, he added. SCO's legal actions against Unix and Linux are rippling across the industry. But the Novell initiative highlights the response now under way. "It seems like there is a groundswell of support focused on pushing this issue aside," IDC analyst Al Gillen said. Hewlett-Packard also offers indemnification. Red Hat has set up a legal defense fund to protect open-source programmers. And on Monday, Intel, IBM and MontaVista Software contributed to a $10 million legal defense that the Open Source Development Labs consortium set up to protect Linux customers against SCO.

Under Novell's plan, the company will provide customers with protection from copyright infringement lawsuits to the tune of $1.5 million, or a factor of 1.25 of their software purchase price. To get the protection, customers must buy SuSE Linux and support from Novell and sign a licensing agreement, Messman said. The program defangs SCO's threats for Linux customers, said Mark Radcliffe, an intellectual-property attorney with Gray Cary. "It's going to make it more difficult for SCO to put pressure on licensees," Radcliffe said. "I assume that now Novell has done it, other people are going to have to do it, whether they like it or not." Indemnifying a customer for 100 percent of their software purchase price is common, because lawsuit damages can be based on the plaintiff's lost profit, he added.

News source: C|Net News.com


The same uproar happened in the motion picture community. The press materials includes a lengthy chronicle of the legal battles between 321 Studios and MGM Studios, Tristar Pictures, Columbia Pictures, and other major motion picture studios. The ironic thing is, 321 Studios was apparently the first company to file any formal complaint -- with the above-mentioned studios listed as defendants.

No doubt, the same barrage of lawsuits will occur between 321 and companies like EA, Microsoft, and Vivendi Universal. That's definitely not an enviable position, as those companies do not mess around (in a litigious context). Games X Copy will be released within the next month, though how long it will be available remains to be seen. Pricing information is still to be determined.

Post a comment · Send to friend Comments · There are 13 additional comments
#1 XxDesmus_MODxX on 13 Jan 2004 - 04:38
wow...that's pretty helpful
#2 Arcticflare on 13 Jan 2004 - 05:27
I think people realize that an attack on linux is something that could potentially disrupt things on a rather unpleasant scale, and that's why efforts like this one are being made.
(3 replies) #3 matric on 13 Jan 2004 - 08:19
Couldn't the "offending" code simply be removed from the operating system? That is one of the great points made by Open Sourcers - that it is free to be changed. Looks like it isn't... If it was, there would be no need for this at all. The offending code could be removed temporarily, while SCO and IBM (& Co) battle it out. If SCO wins, the code stays out and IBM pays it's fees. If SCO loses the code is replaced and the suing of SCO begins.
#3.1 Chicane-UK on 13 Jan 2004 - 09:15
All of the Linux programmers and all those affected have gladly offered to do this. But SCO are not interested, in showing what has supposedly been copied, and has refused to show any examples. They are purely motivated to sue these companies instead of playing ball. They couldn't give a rats ass about IP.. they are just driven by greed.

SCO were supposed to be showing examples of the supposedly copied code in court either yesterday or maybe today.. lets see what happens.
#3.2 roadwarrior on 13 Jan 2004 - 12:30
QUOTE (#3.0)
That is one of the great points made by Open Sourcers - that it is free to be changed. Looks like it isn't... If it was, there would be no need for this at all. The offending code could be removed temporarily, while SCO and IBM (& Co) battle it out.

You obviously haven't been following this story very much. Linus has asked repeatedly for SCO to identify the code so he and the others that maintain Linux can do exactly that, but SCO has refused. Unfortunately for SCO, copyright law requires them to identify the code that they have issue with and allow infringers an opportunity to remove it. If they don't, they significantly reduce the amount that they can claim for damages. The longer SCO keeps the offending code a secret, the less they can claim for damages.
#3.3 matric on 13 Jan 2004 - 22:44
No I haven't at all. I don't have the time. I believe that they think that it is a risk they can take. Earn less from the suit against IBM, but make it up in licensing fees which they charge to companies.
(5 replies) #4 werejag on 13 Jan 2004 - 11:42
the comunity shows it is healthy and is improving. yet another big linux company is protecting its users.

wish microsoft knew this kind of helpfulness to it customers.

now this is a roadmap, ok ballmer
#4.1 notsobetter on 13 Jan 2004 - 12:03
QUOTE
wish microsoft knew this kind of helpfulness to it customers.

now this is a roadmap, ok ballmer


what he hell does that mean?
#4.2 bluebsh on 13 Jan 2004 - 12:11
that made absoutly no sense
#4.3 werejag on 13 Jan 2004 - 13:05
ballmer complained about linux having no roadmap! yet these complaines are doing more for there customers than microaoft would ever be willing to do.


you guys need to read more tech pubs.

#4.4 JaggedFlame on 13 Jan 2004 - 13:32
Last I checked, werejag, no one was suing Microsoft customers. What do you want them to do, release a press statement saying that if anyone ever did, they'd "protect" them? You'd probably still be bitching about something or the other then too.

And if you think "helpfulness" is a roadmap, you need to read more, not them.
#4.5 Chicane-UK on 13 Jan 2004 - 19:11
Lets not try and turn this into a Microsoft bash. It just ends up with loads of pointless arguing.

There aint no need.

Keep it on topic.
#5 Wolfsglen on 13 Jan 2004 - 17:21
Thumbs up to Novell for this.

Commenting has either been disabled on this article or you are not logged in. Click here to login or register, its free!

Note: Anonymous commenting is disabled in order to keep the quality of responses to a high standard.

Advertisement (Why?)