Will Google be ever good again?
That is the question
Donna Bogatin seems to be asking in wake of Google’s introduction of
Universal Search, an idea first put forth by Altavista in the 90s when Altavista was considered the search champion.
Google’s Universal Search aggregates Google search results from video, local, news, and images.
Along with Donna, many will be asking this question: will Google Universal search provide the best answer on top as it reputedly does at present?
Another question that people will be asking is about the relevance of pagerank algorithms, organic search results and whether it is a retrograde step for Google – which started as a provider of clean, fast and accurate results, ending up as mish-mash of things.
Then there is the monopoly question: Donna questions Google’s monopoly-like behavior, changing search results when it wants, claiming to have the best search results, the idiosyncrasies of its adwords/adsense empire – in summary, Google is forcing all web site owners to play by its rules.
So, is this the tipping point for Google?
Labels: google
Time for some Twitter bashing and coffee
Ranting against those who are not heavy on Web 2.0 thingies such as Twitter, Myspace and others,
Decafbad has this to say,
it’s not addressed to you if there’s a buzz and you’re not groking it. That’s a clue that you’re probably missing something.
It is arrogant to say that if one is not enthusiastic about things like Myspace and Twitter, one is missing something.
Why can't this be the other way round?
Maybe it is the case that People who are so busy twittering with their 'circle'/tribe/whatever and spamming Myspace are missing real life.Forget this if real life means your group of friends that you are afraid of let go sometimes in your life.
BTW, when people bash Twitter or any new thing, they are only fueling the fire for the thingy.
Labels: twitter
Is Online Publishing another name for Pageview Sweatsops?
The current description for Forbes.com as a
Pageview Sweatshop fits many other forms of online properties as well.
Blog networks are
Pageview sweatshops, and the pay is less than what it must be at the established Forbes.
Revenue sharing outfits including Hubpages are page view sweatshops as well.
In the offline world, writers wrote the target number of stories and that was it, you had earned your
dihadi – (Hindi for Daily wage)
Offline, your print outlet is competing with a set number of competitors, most of which are started and run by well-off capitalists and an assortment on independently wealthy people.
Online, you are also competing with
spammers, rewriters, SEO and SMM experts, bootstrappers, DIYers.The online writer is
a veritable all-in-one publishing wonder:
she is the writer, the marketer, the networker, the tracker, the analytics analyzer, the salesgirl, and so on.No wonder at Forbes.com the reporters are under constant pressure and editors try but cannt shiled them all the time.
The quality of stories gets hit: most of the stories turn out quickies like lists, new product introductions, rumors, off-the cuff smartypants remarks…where is the time to think?
Moreover,
the page view mentality causes heavy manpower churn.It doesn’t surprise that most of the
deep online writing happens at established and renowned outfits including The New York Times, WSJ, Economist, New Yorker.
Online, outfits like Engadget invent stories, report rumors to get in the traffic or do a story about yet another inane gadget.
Just another day at a Pageview Sweatshop, huh?
Labels: blogging, trends
The long tail is dead, long live the long tail
Although a group of 10 or so sites may account for
most of the internet’s traffic, it is the long tail that provides the spice of conversation.
Nicholas Carr writes in
the Guardian that the Internet is being carved into information plantations, where top 10 big names including Google, Wikipedia, Myspace, Facebook, Yahoo and others accounted for 40% of the internet’s page views.
A couple of players dominate various segments of the internet: Google has 65% of the search market; Yahoo dominates in mail, Myspace in social networks, and so on.
This is not new.
Pareto’s principle existed even before Pareto put a name to the phenomenon.The concentration of power continues in all spheres of human activity, despite the emergence of promising ideologies and technologies throughout history.
Coming to the long tail, the incredibly cheap cost to have an online presence ensures that the marginalized, the individual will continue to have a voice, and there will be more than few ears to hear that solitary thought.
The long tail also ensures that these
‘Information Plantations’ do not turn into ‘Walled Gardens’ of yore.Labels: long tail, research report, trends
British MP using Twitter to campaign
Good news for Twitter lovers everywhere. British MP Alan Johnston is
using Twitter in his campaign to become deputy leader of the Labor party.
Mostly, the twittering campaign consists of constant updates among a growing group of campaign supporters.
However, Indian politicians have used Texting as so-called 21st century PR for quite a while now in this decade of almost universal mobile coverage – sending one-way promotional messages, reminders to vote, exchanging quick texts on polling booth arrangements, who’s buying whom, caste-wise canvassing, the list goes on and on.
Labels: trends, twitter
A quick content analysis of top social news sites
I looked at recent headlines from 6 social news sites: Digg, Newsvine, Slashdot, Boing Boing (group blog), Fark, Metafilter and 1 news site, The New York Times.
I found a couple of things which I would like to share with you:
- Each site has its own quirks and coverage style - No news site is the ultimate news site.In the latest column in
BivingsReport, the writer analyzes what is wrong with Newsvine and offers 3 things that are wrong with the social news site:
1. Too much AP content, most of which is international commodity news easily found elsewhere on the Net.
2. Providing a mix of editorial news content (NYT) and social news content by community does not help user – the study says it could neither get comprehensive editorial matter or exciting social news matter.
3. Too many navigation choices on front page which may confuse users: Most Active Stories, Top Seeds, Newsvine Live, Newsvine Columnists, Top Wire, Newsvis, Group Spotlight, etc.
On the other hand, Digg has just 2 broad sections: Popular and Upcoming
4. AP’s content may be coming in way of more social content coming to the front page.The bottomline: Newsvine must focus on one single thing – exactly what they are. Maybe, you can’t be everything to everyone.
The 7 news sites with recent top 10 stories and my notes for each:DiggWordpress 2.2 officially released!
Borat and Martha Stewart on The Tonight Show
The Lighthouse Skyscraper: 4000 Solar Panels, 3 Huge Wind Turbines [Photos]
Sun's CEO response to Microsoft patent claims
Old IPv4 flaws resurface with IPv6
High Times Editorial Office- NEW CollegeHumor Original
RIAA's IP Gathering Techniques About to be Busted
Windows Vista sells 40M licenses in 100 days
I stole the digg LED sign
Shocking Mainstream Media Defense of Ron Paul's 9/11 debate comments
Note: It is obvious that the Digg Community likes middle-of-the-road, ‘not too deep’ stories on gadgets and science, and quirky online obsessions such as the current penchant for Ron Paul stories. Yesterday, one of the top stories was a list of top wardrobe malfunctions.
NewsvineCar Bomb Kills at Least 32 in Iraq
Sarkozy Inaugurated As France President
4 Peacekeepers Killed in Somalia
Afghans Protest at Pakistan Embassy
Road Accident Kills 20 in India
Daughter of Martin Luther King Jr. Dies
Nigerian Politician's Home Blown Up
Report: Bono Objects to Penthouse Smoke
Sony Corp's Quarterly Loss Widens
LA Wants to Slash Greenhouse Gases
Note: Mostly international stories, nothing stands out in particular.
However, there are occasional flashes of brilliance.
Did you know Newsvine put the Virginia tech shooting story ob front page faster than Digg did?
Metafilter"I am not the attorney general. That's the attorney general."
Semiwar
I'm a great believer in unintended consequences
Wey oh wey oh wey oh wey oh.
Down the memory hole
Awesome Tapes from Africa
V-TECH RAMPAGE
UniverseNewsFilter: Scientists claim to have detected dark matter
Wedding Ring Coffin
Histoire(s) DVD
Note: Metafilter news feels like a cozy magazine for a group of insiders with an all-around coverage style.
The quality of these eclectic stories is good, often making you feel you are reading New Yorker or Atlantic Monthly.
SlashdotClick Here To Infect Your PC!
Wolfram Offers Prize For (2,3) Turing Machine
A Side Effect of Testosterone Poisoning
Threat To Free, Legal Guitar Tablature Online
Independent Human Interface Guidelines
MIT Hacks XKCD Talk With AACS key
US Senators Question Indian Firms Over H-1Bs
The Rise of "Hybrid" Vinyl-MP3s
Toyota Going 100% Hybrid By 2020
Linus Responds To Microsoft Patent Claims
Note: Slashdot’s focus is technology and the stories reflect this. The stories have ore depth than Digg. Reason is obvious: Editors working in the background.
Boing BoingJerry Fallwell talks about his first time.
George Bush's cone of cell phone silence
EL Doctorow's gigantic Civil War novel "The March"
Neuros OSD: a set-top box that treats you like an owner
Your old CD ROMs could help kill a bogus patent!
Insane children's book depicts horse smoking drugs, drinking
Art pieces left on store shelves
Salvador Dali on "What's My Line?"
Physicians for Social Responsibility Gala, June 7
Rocketboom covers Maker Faire
Note: BoingBoing’s forte is
geeky eclectism and it shows up in the story selection on this group blog. The focus is on what geeks like to read, mixed in with the occasional online rights and wrongs type of stories.
FarkIf you are going to make a false claim to police that you were robbed of $3500 you just withdrew from th...
A Hitchhiker's Guide to Instant Karma...
The 160 books boys must read - No Dickens, no Rowling, but yes to Pratchett and Pullman...
Veteran sherpa Appa ; scales Mt Everest for 17th time...
"If you want to play the works of Mozart or Beethoven, you also have to think and feel like the inf...
Old and busted: Drive-In movies. New hotness: Drive-In church...
Proving once again that Italian culture is about 50 years behind, Sophia Loren to strip if Naples moves ...
Photoshop this television technician...
Ugly ass red wolf pups on display at Florida zoo. Complete with ugly ass slideshow in link...
How to surf on calm water using nothing more than a surfboard and a few sticks of dynamite...
Note: Fark is the
zanier, highly opinionated version of Digg.
Its USP: great headlines. It tends to slide towards a pulp read. The new generation supermarket tabloid, perhaps?
NytimesPresident Intervened in Dispute Over Eavesdropping
Poppy Fields Are Now a Front Line in Afghanistan War
Bush Nominee to Get Payment From Old Job
Jerry Falwell, Moral Majority Founder, Dies at 73
Now Departing: Airline Careers
Ivy League Admissions Crunch Brings New Cachet to Next Tier
Bush Picks General to Coordinate War Policy
Among the Rich, a New Dispute Over Air Rights
Terror Attack Scenario Exposes Deep Differences Among G.O.P. Hopefuls
News Analysis: Reality Overtakes the Illusion of Unity in Gaza
The rules
Note: You can feel the heavy duty editorial quality working full-time – news analysis, live reporting, big picture writing.
The Times’ political coverage is evident in today’s headlines but its technological and business coverage is as good and the stories find mention on Digg and Reddit on a daily basis.
This is also where from many bloggers pick stories to write upon.
Labels: Digg, news 2.0, social news
Matt Haughey’s guidebook for Online Community Managers
Matt Haughey founded the popular community weblog
Metafilter in 1999, much before Digg and Reddit happened.
Here is a summary of Matt's originally
7 tips on how to run an online community.
The first tip is actually a part of the preface where Matt says he hates the term User Generated Content.
How? Read on.
1. Don’ use the term User Generated Content: Makes members of your community feel like dutiful robots.
2. Rational not emotional: Avoid getting carried away while dealing with the day-to-day happenings at a typical community: trolls, copycats, useless emails, or someone claiming to own your site. Take your time and be rational about it.
3. Talk like a human: Be the best member of your site. Talk in common man’s language even when you are using your Terms of Service for reference.
4. Offer users an easy-to-modify profiles page where users can store their usage history (100 submitted stories, 120 commented, and so on), and make friends with others, sharing profiles.
5. A section/forum dedicated to discussing the community itself. Matt points out that if Digg had this feature, they would have avoided the ‘revolt’ over HD DVD code brouhaha. Kevin Rose might have put his quandary about legal issue in this section, users would have rated and commented upon it and then a decision might have reached at collectively.
6. Full-time moderator7. 'Flag this post' and 'Favorites 'feature: This is much like Blogger’s
'Flag this blog' feature and helps you use members to moderate your community. The Flag This post must capture essential data such as who flagged it, when, who write it and so on. Having a Digg-Spy like dynamic list of recently flagged posts is a smart idea.
On the other hand, the Favorite feature is common on many social sites.
8. Nuanced, flexible guidelines instead of hard and fast rules: Matt’s approach is to come up with lists such as "ways to be a worthwhile member of this community" and "things you probably shouldn't do" and then explains the approach when needed.
Labels: Digg, social networking, tip
Revising history: the JPG edition
What is it with media startups and revisionism?
Derek Powazek, the co-founder of JPG magazine has left the company he co-founded along with his wife Heather and Cloutier. JPG made a name for being the first print magazine using Digg-like voting to select best photos to put in the print magazine.
Derek has written in detail about the reason for his leaving JPG, which is summary, is thus:
Derek and his wife Heather planned out the idea for JPG while they were having a walk in a park. Recently, Paul Clotier, who was made the CEO of the startup under a new name of 8020 publishing, removed 1-6 issues from the JPG web site, and removed Heather’s name from About page and deleted the “Letter from the editors” page. Derek says Paul wants to put a new spin on how JPG magazine started – Paul wanted it to be a telling of how it all started with 8020 being formed, whereas Derek contends 8020 happened too far down the line.
We have seen such things happen in the online business world, where it is easy to edit web pages – Many content and news websites deliberately remove the list of all who worked before, including all who left on bad terms. Server space is cheap.
Those who want to learn more have to use Google cache (for recent updates) or Archive.org for older pages.
Revisionism often happens in media startups. Before this, there was the spat between
John Battele and Pat McGovern over the aftermath of the failure of The Standard magazine. Then there was Jason Calacanis who was
accused about revising history when he wrote about his time as a journalist in New York.
Revisionism is one of the tools of modern conquerors.
I wish all the best to Derek with his future plans.
Labels: controversey
Looking into online videos' future
Online video is hot. According to Cachelogic, TV shows, YouTube clips, animations, and other video applications account for more than
60 percent of Internet traffic, and some experts say that within two years it will be 98 percent.
In fact there is so much happening in this field that people are discussing chances of
legal P2P networks and
two-tier internet happening in near future.
The new
Forrester report is out and it attacks iTunes as it did
before.
The Forrester report says,
1. The paid video download market in its current evolutionary state will soon become extinct, despite the fast growth and the millions being spent today.
2. Television and cable networks will shift the bulk of paid downloading to ad-supported streams where they have control of ads and effective audience measurement.
3. The movie studios, whose content only makes up a fraction of today’s paid downloads, will put their weight behind subscription models that imitate premium cable channel services.
Is it only me who fails to see any vision in this report?
For starters, it is a bit too far-fetched to think that
enough buzz will be created so that people will stop buying downloaded video and go en-masse for ad-supported online video.
That is old media’s ultimate wet dream.
Looking into the future is a hard job.
At best, these reports are high on
vague generalizations and
aim to create buzz for a particular piece of technology or idea.
The ultimate idea is always to sell overpriced analysis that you can always find easily on Google.
The ongoing
DRM controversy tells us that
consumers like to have control over what they buy.
Moreover,
consumers like owning content. That is why we have so many iPods, DVDs and so on.
In future, we might be carrying our favorite content with us.
While 1.5 billion iTunes songs have been sold, subscription-based services have flopped so far.
When you diss iTunes, aren’t you discounting the huge iTunes user base as well?
Analyzing what the old media corporates would do won’t cut in a world where people have far too many choices over their media diet, and far too many ways in which you can access your choices – PC, Net, Mobile, TV, iPod and like, Apple TV, Tivo, Bittorrent, and so on.
Why not analyze what the video consumer would like to do? Therein lays the clue to how our sons and daughters will access their media.
1. There will always be people who don’t mind advertising interrupting their viewing and those who abhor it.
The 'ad time per hour' rate on TV varies anywhere between 10-20 minutes per hour.
2. There will always be people who like to watch high-quality video on their TV (using DVD, Apple TV, iPod, downloaded material) and those who don’t mind watching online video of indeterminate quality.
3. Some people will go for paid-for downloads, others for streaming and few will go in for subscriptions (subscription based service haven’t made it till now.)
4. When you say that ad-supported shows are in, how do you make sure that there aren’t million channels online, along with a million formats?
5.
It would be too simplistic that the TV channels and the movie studios will be the biggest aggregators online as well, in view of the challenge posed by the likes of Youtube and other layers, who have an installed base. What stops them from starting a comedy channel?
6. Then there is
the cost issue.smart consumers will compare costs for downloading shows, for subscribing to cable programming and for online net usage, and other choices before making a decision.
7. And there is the technology issue.
What is there to stop people from finding an online version of Tivo that removes the ads as the show is being streamed? A user can easily move to the next Firefox browser tab while an ad is being shown on one show.
8. If
pay-per-view is dead and how do you explain boxing shows, porn, educational shows and other niches?
9. The
download option is always available to those who prefer to be master of their destiny, people who must have their own channel.
10.
The Joost effect is to happen soon, so I cannot say how the concept of
‘view whatever, whenever’ will influence models of existing broadcasters and movie producers.
11. What happens to the superstar economy?The present model of broadcasters is also based on paying huge amounts to sport stars, TV stars and movie stars.
I would like to know more about what effects the online revolutions have on the situation. Or, will it be that the Mathew effect holds sway in all forms of activity?
Labels: online video, research report
The hard path to online riches with Online videos
Ok, so you start by putting your show on Youtube, people like it, you start getting a share of ad revenue that Youtube has started to share.
Will that cover your costs and is this your future?Making online videos is much, much different from blogging.
Ultimately, you will want to have your own video site where you don’t have to share ad revenue with others - earning through adsense, sponsorships and deals with select advertisers.
You started selling t-shirts, bags and other merchandise right from the start.
Your ultimate aim has to be one of these three things:1. People pay and subscribe to your show.
2. People buy downloads or DVDs of your show
3. You are able to parlay your online hits into a lucrative mainstream career, something done by Amanda Congdon.
As with other things in life, it is a tough slog, often extending your will to breaking point.
It is now common knowledge that the
aggregators like Youtube hold the real media power.
They act as
destination sites where all the big advertisers and the audience converge.
On your own, you will find it hard to do deals with sponsorships and other advertisers if your traffic is in thousands.
The point: You need the recognition and traffic from the aggregators but you will have to do more to really make it big long term.
Businessweek has an article on the hard road to online profits for content creators.
Related useful linksPaying users of web 2.0 sites19 ways to make social sites payLabels: online video, tip
18 tips to help you become an Online Video Star
Picking up from where
Mashable went some days back, a
WSJ article gives advice on how to be a start on online video sites such as Youtube. Much of the advice is based on the same themes that go in towards making a successful blogger.
Find out for yourself:
1.
Getting in early helps build a better tentpole
2.
Find a niche: For example, the Grammar Girl mixes a beautiful girl taking about grammar.
3.
Word of mouth is important.
4.
Work the virtual room: participate in discussion forums. The creators of the Lonelygirl show started planning comments on other videos under lonelygirl’s name before the show started.
5.
Remix other people’s videos: the lonelygirl people do this often
6.
Professional approach: For example, each 3 minute Lonelygirl video takes 10 hours to make. The Ask a Ninja guys spend upto 18 hours producing a 3-4 minute show.
Now, what makes a successful video?Mashable did a story on it, listing at least 5 ways to be great online:
1. Learn to dance very, very well2. Be pretty: Remember Amanda Congdon?
3. Act stupid in front of the camera
4. Learn to play the guitar really well5. Create a meme: for example, people have made a hit out of taking a photo of self everyday and then aggregating it in a 60-second spot.
What kind of Video shows work online?SimpleGuide has a nice roundup of successful video blogging, listing 7 proven video blogging styles:
1. Tutorials 2. Critiques on Popular TV shows, movies, music 3. Tour the Nation4. Aggregate the best of other Video Blogs and add your commentary
5. The Daily show/Tonight show model: in 3-4 minutes6. The Ask Prudence model: ask weird, outlandish questions
7. Cover live events.Labels: online video, tip
Lesson from the Scientology debate: Let a million Counter Footages bloom
I hope that by now you know about the ongoing ‘Youtubed’
spat between Scientology believers including John Travolta and BBC reporter John Sweeney for the Panorama program on the Scientology cult .
The Cult has often been accused of brainwashing followers, making them undergo series of torturous experiments to wean them away from reliance on Psychiatrists.
As you know, Scientology claims that humans have descended from a race of aliens called
thetans.
First to take the charge were the Scientologists who posted videos on Youtube showing John Sweeney loosing his cool when he was accused of being soft on Scientology critics.
Mr. Sweeney reportedly said,
"Now listen to me. You were not there at the beginning of the interview! You were not there! You did not hear or record all the interview!"
This is what we learn from smart Web 2.0 communication masters.
The Scientology people made sure they taped the interview as well to make sure both versions of the interview was available to the public.
There could even be more versions, if it comes to that.
Lesson #1: What if everyone started taping their own interviews? For example, often in TV interviews, you say some thing else but later they edit it to mean something else.
Carrying a camera phone would be wise and later you can upload your video on Youtube.
Interestingly,
BBC is going to broadcast the ‘angry’ part of the interview.
Going back to
Scientology debate, I am not a big champion of organized anything other than sports and entertainment.
The other interesting thing about this episode is that while the Scientologists attacked the reporter’s impartiality,even going so far as to send the 100,000 decision makers, they had nothing to say about the content of the program itself.
That’s
PR lesson #2 for you. Divert attention.Labels: controversey, online video, tip
Friction TV: The Youtube of Debate
Created by Omar Sheikh, former head of Saatchi & Saatchi interactive and PR consultant Andy West, Friction TV will be
launched this week in U.K. aiming to be the
‘virtual speakers’ destination, where people can upload videos of themselves arguing about and challenging issues that affect them most, including hot popular culture topics such as whether it is indeed OK to have reporters accompanying Prince Harry’s trip to Iraq.
To get things going, the site has already been seeded by videos of some prominent personalities in U.K.
The ad-supported site, which will also be accessible from Mobiles won’t be moderated but the webmasters may remove objectionable racial or personal attacks.
To popularize Friction TV, the promoters plan to erect
Friction TV booths along the lines of Quick photo booths, in public places where people can record themselves without having to go with the hassle of setting things up for recording in their homes.
A related idea: Why not have a Friction TV channel on Youtube?
You get more exposure and can save on bandwidth charges.
Labels: Frictio Tv, online video, youtube
255 ways Microsoft is confused today
Microsoft’s allegations that the open source movement has infringed upon no less than 255 patents, as reported in
Fortune, can unsettle the most die hard among open source supporters.
Microsoft says that the Linux kernel violates 42 Microsoft patents, followed by Linux GUIs which violate 65 patents, Open Office suite violates 45 patents, E-mail programs violate 5, the remaining 68 violations being done by other popular FOSS programs, for a grand total of 255 violations.
Sob...poor company
Sure it reads like a list of U.N. resolution violations by the
‘Axis of Good’.
However, dear FOSS supporters, there is actually nothing to worry about.
Weak legal standing
1. Let’s start with Patents. Open source supporters say that software essentially being a mathematical algorithm, cannot be patented.
2. In April this year, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously opined that
far too many patents have been issued in the last 20 years or so.
The Patent office is okaying patents like evacuation coupons.
3. The Free Open Source Software movement has big patrons in form of the
Open Invention Network, formed in 2005 by 6 major companies including IBM, Sony, Philips, Novell, and Red Hat to acquire a wide set of patents that companies like Microsoft might said were copied from them.
So if Microsoft ever sues a Linux distributor for patent infringement, the OIN might countersue Microsoft in retaliation, claiming that Windows infringes upon their patent.
This opens up a scary world of
suing and countersuing until one day the courts rule that patent system is harmful to one and all, dead.
4. Whom will you sue?There are far too many open source developers, hackers, distributors to pin point.
Hell, if it comes to that, even you and I can hack Linux, creating yet other new versions.
It is like, how many remixes can you make?
In this scenario, can Microsoft be like RIAA and start suing everyone?
What a fall for a once mighty corporation.
5. The Novell Deal and Microsoft's hypocricyThe sloth giant is caught confused in its own dead weight.
Microsoft knows it cannot be aggressive about suing big companies using Open source software, some of whom are big buyers of Microsoft as well.
Then to matters worse for itself, in 2006, Micrsoft made a deal with a prominent Linux distributor, Novell, under which both agreed not to sue each other’s customers for patent infringements (see above), Novell would give Microsoft royalty and Microsoft would distribute Linux coupons from Novell that enabled customers to trade in for Novell Linux subscriptions.
In plain terms, this means
Microsoft is a Linux distributor.6. Don’t mess with the GPL license Anyone who distributes free software covered by copyrights owned by the
Free Software Foundation (the norm since the Linux movement started in 1991) has to abide by the GNU General Public License (GPL), written by Free Software evangelist Richard Stallman. As of now, most important portions of the Linux OS come under GPL.
Like Microsoft Lawyers, lawyers for FSF strictly enforce the rules as strictly, if not more and have often forced open source developers to open their source code if they have used free software into proprietary products.
What will go against Microsoft in the Novell deal is that
GPL makes it illegal to do patent royalty deals with distributors of Linux, which is the core of the Microsoft deal with Novell (see above).
Final thoughtsIt is ironic that
a ‘virtual’ Linux distributor is planning to sue other distributors and users!It also doesn’t bode well for Microsoft infamous PR. Where are those dollars going?
It might also mean that the SCO lawsuits are not going anywhere.
Microsoft may have helped the Open Source Movement:If the issue comes out in the open, the tireless open source programmers would soon get their hands on all the alleged infringements and hack around them.
So, will Microsoft win against the ‘Axis of Good’?
I think not.
Labels: controversey, Microsoft, monopoly, open source, patents
