One theory on why Microsoft is making noise

Stephen J. Vaughn-Nichols of Linux-Watch lets this one out at the end of his story on Microsoft's allegation of patent infringement in open-source software (get ready fo a big chunk of quoted material, all of which is necessary to understand the point):

(Begin quote)

So, while Microsoft's latest claims may sound terrible to the layman, any attorney worth his or her salt will know that these are old and basically bogus statements. So, why is Microsoft trotting them back out again?

I believe it serves two purposes. One is to spread more FUD about Linux and open-source. For the first time, a major computer vendor, Dell, has committed to a consumer desktop Linux. More states, like California, are considering making laws that require the use of the ODF (Open Document Format). From Microsoft's point of view, it was time to get people worried about open-source again.

The other purpose is to try to get leverage against the upcoming GNU GPLv3 (General Public License, version 3). The latest draft includes patent language that will make it much harder to make patent deals, such as the November 2006 Microsoft and Novell partnership.

Why should Microsoft care? Because, Microsoft, by distributing SLES (SUSE Linux Enterprise Server) certificates to customers such as Dell, as part of the Novell/Microsoft partnership, may have just placed any IP they might or might not have in Linux, under the GPL.

No, that's not just open-source fanboy talk. Prominent open-source lawyers, like Eben Moglen, the executive director of the Software Freedom Law Center, believe that by distributing the SLES certificates, Microsoft has become a Linux distributor, and therefore subject to the GPL.

For Microsoft, being subject to the GPL in any way, shape, or form would be a nightmare scenario. If they can get some leverage in their fight to get away from the GPL by getting people frightened of open source, they will.

(End quote)

It's pretty clear that Microsoft will do whatever it needs to do in order to remain at the top of the software heap. But there are cracks in the armor. When MS was woefully behind on the Internet, it succeeded in crushing Netscape and promoting its own IE browser. And while Netscape did, indeed, fade away, so did Microsoft's attention paid to its own browser, leaving room for Firefox (and with it Google search) to take away a large chunk of that market that can't be reclaimed, even with IE 7.

At another level, the threat of lawsuits will only embolden Google to further develop its Google Apps stable of online-based productivity programs -- and possibly to enter the operating system market with a product that, like Linux, doesn't need Windows to function.

And while some -- or even many -- makers of open-source software might be turned back by Microsoft's legal charge, there will also be some who will fight any potential litigation. And actually getting into court is something Microsoft really does not want. Remember the last time Bill Gates had to do a depo?