-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
IBM and the labors of TurboHercules
,----[ Quote ]
| The story starts with the Hercules emulator,
| which lets PC-type systems pretend to be IBM's
| System/370 and ESA/390 mainframe
| architectures. Hercules is good enough to run
| systems like z/OS or z/VM, and, according to
| the project's FAQ, it has been used for
| production use at times, even if that's not
| its stated purpose. The project is licensed
| under the OSI-certified Q Public License.
|
| Enter TurboHercules SAS, which seeks to
| commercialize the Hercules system. The company
| offers supported versions of Hercules -
| optionally bundled with hardware - aimed at
| the disaster recovery market. Keeping a backup
| mainframe around is an expensive proposition;
| keeping a few commodity systems running
| Hercules is rather cheaper. It's not hard to
| imagine why companies which are stuck with
| software which must run on a mainframe might
| be tempted by this product - as a backup plan
| or as a way to migrate off the mainframes
| entirely.
`----
http://lwn.net/Articles/382350/
Recent:
Matt Asay: Completely Wrong on IBM Patents
http://watchingthewatchers.org/indepth/1357474/matt-asay-completely-wrong-ibm-patents
The IBM open source pledge amended
,----[ Quote ]
| The real news is that Eric Raymond agrees
| with Mueller. The author of The Cathedral
| and the Bazaar, which did so much to define
| open source as distinct from Richard
| Stallmanâs free software ideal, says IBM is
| digging itself into an ever-deeper
| rhetorical hole.
`----
http://blogs.zdnet.com/open-source/?p=6223
Turbo tempest over TurboHercules
,----[ Quote ]
| Jones got into this with a long Groklaw post
| that has 11 updates (so far) acting as
| exhibits. Itâs the fiercest debate there
| since the end of the Novell case, which is
| to say in about two weeks.
|
| A summary is that TurboHercules started this
| mess, that IBM has not even filed a case,
| and that it looks like a shakedown by
| Herculesâ Roger Bowler and Jay Maynard.
| (Raymond credits Maynard with bringing him
| into the case.)
`----
http://blogs.zdnet.com/open-source/?p=6240
IBM and TurboHercules: The Patents, the Pledge and the Blogosphere Brawl
http://www.technewsworld.com/story/69744.html?wlc=1271185115
FOSS Claims of IBM Breaking Promise Seem Mostly Smoke, Little Fire
,----[ Quote ]
| The thing is, Mueller may have jumped the
| gun on his accusations that Big Blue was
| giving the finger to the open source
| community.
`----
http://www.itworld.com/open-source/104222/foss-claims-ibm-breaking-promise-seem-mostly-smoke-little-fire
Press Release: More Ado About Big Blue and Patents
,----[ Quote ]
| Florian Mueller, Open Source Patent
| Activist, just released the following
| information. He believes that patents
| already used by IBM against TurboHercules
| are also a threat to other major FOSS
| projects. He now calls on the community for
| action.
`----
http://www.daniweb.com/news/story275226.html
EUROPE: Open-source Advocate Enters IBM Antitrust Fray
http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=15564
IBM vs. TurboHercules: Our story thus far...
http://www.linux-magazine.com/Online/News/IBM-vs.-TurboHercules-Our-story-thus-far
IBM: Open Sourceâs Friend or Foe?
http://robertogaloppini.net/2010/04/06/ibm-open-sources-friend-or-foe/
IBM says it won't sue to protect open-source patents
http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9175058/IBM_says_it_won_t_sue_to_protect_open_source_patents_
â When Reptiles Attack: Has IBM Tired Of FOSS?
,----[ Quote ]
| Despite the temptation to believe that some
| companies are unequivocal supporters of
| free and open source software, we should
| never forget that all for-profit companies
| are actually reptiles, acting instinctively
| on behalf of their shareholders and not
| acting on the basis of intellectual or
| philosophical insight. An expression of
| support will inevitably be a statement by a
| group of people within the company,
| motivated by a business activity. It will
| have been made in the context of a set of
| tensions between different priorities and
| with other groups of people in the same
| company. It will be the direction instinct
| has been steered by the availability of
| âfoodâ and the presence of âthreatâ. Every
| expression of support â or act of
| aggression â needs to be seen in that
| light.
|
| An important part of my job at Sun was to
| monitor actions they took that affected
| communities. I monitored the flow of
| requests to use and release open source
| code, ran the Ombudsman service so that I
| was first to hear of community issues, and
| acted as a (mostly!) âtrusted friendâ to
| Sunâs legal staff prior to any action they
| took. At regular intervals throughout my
| five year tenure, I spoke up for
| communities and ensured that the actions
| taken in Sunâs name were not harmful to a
| community or Sunâs FOSS reputation. On some
| occasions I even had to request executive
| back-up for my position, in effect
| requesting a veto power.
|
| Regardless of the merits of IBMâs case
| against TurboHercules, the fact the
| incident has happened at all is an
| important signal. I canât for a moment
| believe this is the first time since IBMâs
| patent pledge that any part of the company
| has wanted to act against a community
| participant. We can see the tension between
| the statement Dan Frye makes through the
| Linux Foundation and the statement of
| another IBM spokesperson in the WSJ
| attempting to say the Pledge doesnât apply
| to everyone. To hazard a guess, the
| competition is now characterised by Google
| â a huge user of and contributor to open
| source software â instead of IBMâs old
| foes, Microsoft and Solaris.
`----
http://webmink.com/2010/04/08/reptile-attack/
Is IBM splitting hairs with open source?
,----[ Quote ]
| Itâs no secret that Iâm a big Free Software
| fan. Itâs no secret that IBM is a giant
| company with more money than I can possibly
| imagine. So I was pretty happy in 2005 when
| IBM, in an obvious PR stunt to get buddy-
| buddy with the open source community, made
| its Statement of Non-Assertion of Named
| Patents Against OSS, ostensibly saying that
| it would permit open source projects to use
| any of the items covered by those patents
| without risk of penalty or lawsuit. Yay!
| Finally, a BigCo getting it and doing the
| right thing! But five years is a long time,
| people come and go, and promises can be
| forgotten. IBM has lately threatened to sue
| someone for infringement of a lot of IBM
| patents, including at least two that were
| included in the Non-Assertion statement.
|
| [...]
|
| More plausibly, what I think is going on
| here is one of two things. Either the
| lawyers got a little over-excited in
| creating the non-exclusive list of patents
| used to threaten TurboHercules and included
| two patents covered by the Non-Assertion
| statement; or IBM thinks theyâre free to
| sue the company, and not the open source
| project itself, for the patent
| infringement. My guess is itâs the latter.
`----
http://www.crunchgear.com/2010/04/08/is-ibm-splitting-hairs-with-open-source/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
iEYEARECAAYFAkvI2b0ACgkQU4xAY3RXLo76hQCeMPoo2e5cSLJgzZ2ldpiQbCe+
jowAniH2PorUTTqEP76oCQLmUnVkSadf
=jtIu
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
|
|
