Bruce Perens comenta processo da Microsoft contra a TomTom

Bem bacana a análise do Bruce Perens sobre o novo ataque jurídico da Microsoft contra o software livre.

O texto destaca as patentes relativas ao processo que o monopólio de Seattle está movendo contra a fabricante de aparelhos para navegação automotiva, TomTom.

De acordo com Perens, deve ser FUD mesmo, já que a Microsoft teria pouquíssima chance de vencer no tribunal.

O FUD teria sido precipitado pelo anúncio do governo da Grã-Bretanha de encorajar compras de softwares com código aberto ou pela vontade de colocar notícias do processo nas primeiras páginas, relegando as reportagens sobre prejuízos e cortes de pessoal para o meio dos cadernos de economia.

Bruce Perens: Analyzing Microsoft's TomTom Lawsuit

Another possibility is that Microsoft knows it can't win this time, but has brought this case to spread anti-Linux FUD in the news at a time when Linux is making critical gains against Microsoft. For example, the United Kingdom government recently announced it will strongly encourage Open Source for its own IT procurement. TomTom is very popular in the UK. This case is already being heavily reported there, and will become a speaking point for those who oppose the government move.

What makes me think the case might be a FUD move, rather than something real, is that Microsoft would probably lose if there were a close examination of these patents. So, they can't afford to let the case proceed. I suspect that Microsoft is betting that TomTom will settle, and thus bolster the patents’ weak position publicly through its acquiescence. Another possibility is that Microsoft is willing to trade the PR value of front-page FUD today for a mostly un-noted loss on back pages next year.

De qq modo, há grande possibilidade do tiro sair pela culatra e invalidar de vez as patentes relacionadas ao FAT.

Bruce Perens: Analyzing Microsoft's TomTom Lawsuit

Do other legal issues potentially invalidate the software patents in question? Very likely.

The recent court decisions in the Bilski case and KSR v. Teleflex have substantially weakened software patents and overturned the case that made business method patents possible. The Public Patent Foundation (PubPat) had previously convinced the U.S. Patent Office to invalidate one of the FAT patents on prior art grounds, which means they convinced the Patent Office that the same thing had been made previous to Microsoft's patent application and wasn't an invention at all. Microsoft appealed and had the patent reinstated, in a patent-office proceeding where PubPat wasn't given a chance to speak. In the aftermath of that poor process, the judge in Microsoft v. TomTom will have the power to invalidate that patent permanently, based on the same prior-art evidence that PubPat presented. So this case, if allowed to proceed, could be of great advantage to Linux and Open Source by putting the FAT patents to bed permanently.

Além disso a inciativa reabre a discussão sobre o mal que as patentes fazem para a indústria de software e também sobre o processo anti-truste contra a Microsoft que virou em pizza de elefante no começo deste século.