When Microsoft contributed drivers to Linux to GPLv2, my reaction (and the general reaction in the community) was that “hell had frozen over” and to bring out the skates http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/features/2009/Jul09/07-20LinuxQA.mspx. Several recent reports suggest that these contributions were not voluntary and Microsoft had included GPLv2 licensed code in these drivers http://linux-network-plumber.blogspot.com/2009/07/congratulations-microsoft.html (Steve Hemminger of Vyatta) and http://www.kroah.com/log/linux/microsoft-linux-hyper-v-drivers.html (Greg Kroah-Hartman of Novell).
I view this contribution as valuable even if legal concerns drove it. I think that Microsoft acted as a responsible member of the community which is the behavior that we want to encourage. They could have simply rewritten the code to remove the open source components. I am under no illusion that Microsoft has suddenly turned into a complete supporter of open source (and for clarity, neither I nor my law firm represents them). However, Microsoft’s engagement with the open source community is going to be a gradual one and will have fits and starts. Microsoft is still fundamentally based on a proprietary model and has that mind set. They can change and should be encouraged to change. I hope that these revelations will not result in an attack on Microsoft for not being “truly” committed to the open source community. We should, instead, encourage them to continue to be involved.
This situation is a warning to companies that they need to have an open source policy and a process for managing their work with the open source software. See my earlier post, http://lawandlifesiliconvalley.com/blog/?p=107.
In fact, I think that the Microsoft press announcement bears further scrutiny, In addition to the announcement of the contribution, Sam Ramji mentions several ways in which Microsoft is implementing open source in their business strategy. This increased use of open source by Microsoft should be encouraged.
Ray Ozzie, Chief Architect of Microsoft Corporation, led off DLA Piper’s Global Technology Leader’s Summit. In describing the future of computing, he reminded the audience that the existing operating systems were designed in a world of 56k modems. He believes that the widespread access to broadband has dramatically changed computing.
He noted that the two major trends that will be critical to the future of computing are cloud computing and consumer use of multiple devices. However, these issues are complicated and will vary by country. He noted that in India, the primary “screen” is the cellphone, yet in the PRC, consumers use both the cellphone and the PC. These devices are used very differently and offer different opportunities: the cellphone is very effective in obtaining information with the PC more effective at manipulating information.
He then turned to the growth of social networks and their potential dark side. He described the problems that the Well and its community had with flame wars and other bad behavior. He believes that the current social networks need to be careful about how they run their services to avoid these problems. The most interesting point that he made was that frequently what works in a public social network is likely not to work “inside” the corporation because of the different dynamics.
For more information about the Technology Summit, see the official blog: http://www.dlatechlaw.com/
The question of how Microsoft will respond to competition with open source software is beginning to be answered. I have already discussed the views of Stanford and Harvard Business School professors in an earlier post http://lawandlifesiliconvalley.com/blog/?p=74.
Jean Louis Gasse, a smart entrepeneur and technologist who is now a venture capitalist, suggests that Microsoft is working on a comprehensive strategy for the threat to its Windows operating system which includes responses in all three areas of risk: servers, mobile and desktop. http://www.mondaynote.com/?p=1022. As he describes it:
Microsoft’s Live services are but a rehearsal for a much bigger act, Microsoft’s Cloud OS, sometimes called Strata. And, based on Microsoft’s own Cloud services, we’ll see a Danger-based smartphone, as proprietary as the Xbox and the iPod competitor Zune. Put another way, Microsoft’s future business model will borrow from Apple and Google, it will have two components: proprietary devices and “universal” Cloud services
I recommend that companies using open source stay alert for the next month as this new strategy rolls out.
Yesterday, during an onstage interview at the San Francisco Web 2.0 Summit, Ballmer stated: “Microsoft will continue to invest in buying technology, products and market share. We’ll buy 20 companies a year consistently for the next five years for anywhere between 50 million and 1 billion bucks. We will buy smaller companies. We will buy smaller companies that make some use of open source software. We don’t want to discourage people who would talk with us just because they do some open source.” This statement is change from Ballmer’s long held hostility and dismissive attitude towards FOSS companies. Based on my experience in selling companies to Microsoft, it is a big change. The last time I sold a company to Microsoft (several years ago now), they initially wanted to remove all open source components in the product although they eventually settled for leaving in some open source components because of the difficulty of rewriting them. However, the FOSS community should not break out the champagne: Ballmer is simply acknowledging the reality that virtually all companies, certainly Web 2.0 companies, are built on FOSS. The statement is the business equivalent of stating that Microsoft will buy companies that are subject to the law of gravity.
Yet in an odd way it is consistant with Ballmer’s recent demands that Linux users pay Microsoft royalties. I was discussing these statements with Karen Copenhaver, counsel for the Linux Foundation and one of the most thoughtful lawyers in the open source market, at the SFLC seminar last week and she made the point that Ballmer’s statements about Linux are an acknowledgement that Linux is a real competitor to Microsoft. This acknowledgement is also consistant with Microsoft’s other moves to engage more broadly with the FOSS community such as their recent successful application to the OSI to approve some of their licenses.
However, the FOSS community should celebrate Microsoft’s acknowledgement, however indirect, that FOSS is a real competitor.