An Inconsistency in the Microsoft-Novell Stories

From Pamela Jones:

"Did Microsoft detail what patents it thinks Linux infringes when it was negotiating the deal with Novell or not? The parties are telling two different stories, and furthermore, Microsoft has now told two different stories. First it said it didn't, but now it says it did. Let me show you what I noticed.

Novell's story:

Novell yesterday issued a statement on the Fortune article, in which it reiterates that as far as Novell is concerned, it does not believe that there are any Microsoft patents that Linux infringes...

Microsoft told Matthew Aslett of CBROnline, Aslett writes, that it had not detailed patents to Novell prior to the deal...

Microsoft said it not only hadn't laid them out on the table before Novell, it hadn't even carefully looked itself...

Now, however, Microsoft sings a different tune and says it did share details about specific patents with Novell...

This raises a couple of questions, the most obvious being that since somebody isn't being truthful with us, we have to ask if we wish to do business with folks whose stories change if they perceive a benefit to themselves. That really is the value-add of FOSS, you know. Nobody lies to you. The software has always come with the ethics attached.

But deeper, let's take Microsoft's story, the current one, as true. After all, we should expect to be able to rely on a VP of intellectual property and licensing to know. He says Microsoft told Novell which patents are infringing. So the real question is this: is this in fact a patent cross license on specific patents after all? If it is, are we looking at a GPLv2 violation on its face?"