[odf-discuss] Novell's Michael Meeks on ODF

[Daniel Carrera]

Christian Einfeldt wrote:
> The most direct reason for me bringing this up now is a discussion on /. 
> that some of us here might want to monitor.  It's a story in which 
> Michael Meeks of Novell is commenting on ODF and MSOOXML:
> 
> http://linux.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/09/29/2341224

Trying to be optimistic, I was happy to see a pro-ODF comment from Michael:

"Q: Isn't one file format better than two? Surely the weakness of having 
many is the confusion it creates?

A: Well, yes, and it should be ODF..."

Then he essentially says "but sadly it won't happen".


> http://linux.slashdot.org/linux/07/09/28/0544226.shtml
> 
> Now I do recall that maybe Lars or Daniel has said that they are 
> critical of Novell for protecting only the official Novell versions of 
> OOo, and I usually agree with most of what Daniel and Lars say.

The MS-Novell deal gave "patent protection" to Novell customers against 
unspecified MS patents infringed by Linux. This creates a precedent that 
Linux users are a pack of thieves who owe MS money.

> In this 
> case, though, I am not currently all that bothered by the fact that a 
> corporation would only support code it distributes; in fact, I would say 
> that Novell's actions could be seen as encouraging others to do the same 
> with code they distribute.

And that's part of the problem. Is it fair that every Linux distribution 
pay Microsoft money for "patent protection" without MS ever having to 
list any actual patents that they allege is being violated? Where do you 
draw the line between sound business and mafia-like extortion?

Daniel.