Government // Enterprise Architecture
Commentary
4/24/2008
11:45 AM
Serdar Yegulalp
Serdar Yegulalp
Commentary
Connect Directly
Google+
Twitter
RSS
E-Mail
50%
50%

Microsoft's Patents, Under The Microscope

Microsoft's whole Catch-22 of Linux infringing on certain patents claimed by them has gone on long enough.  We all know this -- but barring some major (and I do mean major) changes on Microsoft's side, it's looking fairly futile to expect them to come out and say what the infringing patents are.  Time to bring in some third-party muscle, and that's what Tom Kemp of Centrify has just attempted to do.

Microsoft's whole Catch-22 of Linux infringing on certain patents claimed by them has gone on long enough.  We all know this -- but barring some major (and I do mean major) changes on Microsoft's side, it's looking fairly futile to expect them to come out and say what the infringing patents are.  Time to bring in some third-party muscle, and that's what Tom Kemp of Centrify has just attempted to do.

Centrify makes Active Directory auditing and access control software that works on multiple platforms, so it's plain that it has a vested interest in learning as much as possible about Microsoft's protocols and patent assertions.  In a lengthy and detailed blog post named "Mapping Microsoft Windows Server Protocols to Patents," Kemp talks a bit about the history of Microsoft's recent steps toward openness, and about how in some ways this openness may make things worse, not better:

Now that the protocols were posted and Microsoft had articulated its position vis-à-vis protocols and patents, one immediate issue came to my mind: how does a developer easily know which specific protocols really do leverage patents that Microsoft holds? If you look at the "cover page" of each protocol on MDSN, each one does have a generic "this may contain IP" warning, but they don't tell you which specific protocols leverage specific patents that Microsoft holds.

To that end, Kemp did a bit of digging and created an Excel spreadsheet (yes, Excel, the irony is not lost on me) that attempts to map specific patent applications to Microsoft protocols.  It makes for fascinating reading, to say the least, although Kemp does stress that none of this information is guaranteed to be accurate -- just that it's based on his own best guesses and research.

People have asked me before: if Microsoft's attitude about patents has been so insular, why not simply write them off and go our own merry (open source) way?  The answer is that it isn't that easy in the real world, where there exists a market for products, open source or otherwise, that interoperate with MS's solutions.  And until Microsoft decides to quit playing patent games once and for all, research like this will come in handy.  Kudos, Tom.

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Register for InformationWeek Newsletters
White Papers
Current Issue
InformationWeek Tech Digest, Dec. 9, 2014
Apps will make or break the tablet as a work device, but don't shortchange critical factors related to hardware, security, peripherals, and integration.
Video
Slideshows
Twitter Feed
InformationWeek Radio
Archived InformationWeek Radio
Join us for a roundup of the top stories on InformationWeek.com for the week of December 7, 2014. Be here for the show and for the incredible Friday Afternoon Conversation that runs beside the program!
Sponsored Live Streaming Video
Everything You've Been Told About Mobility Is Wrong
Attend this video symposium with Sean Wisdom, Global Director of Mobility Solutions, and learn about how you can harness powerful new products to mobilize your business potential.