* Microsoft vows to indemnify customers against legal suits
It was big news last January when Novell told users of its SuSE Linux software that it would indemnify them against patent and copyright claims from other software vendors (see links below). Novell wanted to reassure its customers that the actions of The SCO Group, which is claiming that all sorts of its rights are being violated in Linux distributions, would not have a harmful effect on customers’ businesses.
It was big news last January when Novell told users of its SuSE Linux software that it would indemnify them against patent and copyright claims from other software vendors (see links below). Novell wanted to reassure its customers that the actions of The SCO Group, which is claiming that all sorts of its rights are being violated in Linux distributions, would not have a harmful effect on customers’ businesses.
So last week, when Microsoft announced that it would indemnify its customers – who was it planning to protect us from?
Microsoft had already concluded a licensing deal with SCO last May to acquire the ability to legitimize any of SCO’s intellectual property that might happen to occur in Microsoft products, so there’d be no reason for SCO – that most litigious of software vendors – to attempt a move on Microsoft customers.
Recently, Redmond has also reached agreements on a number of outstanding lawsuits – most notably with Novell and the Computer & Communications Industry Association (CCIA) – but few of those involved misuse of intellectual property. Even the disputes with Real Networks and Burst.com involve anti-trust and anti-competitive actions rather than intellectual property rights.
There is still that nagging, on-again, off-again, do-they-or-don’t-they-have-a-patent litigation with Eolas (https://www.nwfusion.com/news/2004/0306eolaspaten.html). Still, most knowledgeable gurus believe that Eolas cannot prevail on that issue.
So, as I asked, who is Microsoft going to indemnify against?
Actually, it’s really a ploy. A scheme. A marketing-driven campaign. Here’s the thinking:
* Linux vendors are indemnifying their customers against intellectual property suits.
* Customers see the indemnification as a free legal insurance policy.
* If Novell can give its customers a free insurance policy, shouldn’t Microsoft?
Redmond’s marketing geniuses hope that businesses see “indemnification” as some great feature of an operating system, application or service. Certainly no one looks forward to being sued, so Microsoft gets to make a big splash announcing the indemnification program. It gets to tout its “blanket” indemnification coverage when going head-to-head with other operating system vendors for your business. IBM, facing a suit from SCO, isn’t as able to offer blanket protection for you.
It’s a cheap marketing ploy by Microsoft and shouldn’t be a factor in your decision about choosing an operating system vendor.
