As my mum told me, when the going got tough at primary school, the answer was not to announce that it's your ball and you're going home, because nobody ever made friends by penalising everyone when you didn't get your own way.
"That's what bullies do," she said. Before you wonder where all this is going, I'll impart one last gem - attracting the attention of a bully is, in many ways, a form of flattery; they go after people they feel threatened by. Or, as the nuns at my school were so fond of telling us: "Empty vessels make the most noise."
I'm a Linux user. I'm writing this using Open Office. I downloaded my mail this morning using Thunderbird. My browser preferences vary, but I've settled on Firefox, warts and all. None of this software cost me a cent. But it seems I might be a thief or, at the very least, in the company of thieves.
Microsoft says my chosen operating system infringes on 42 of its patents. My GUI is responsible for a further 65 breaches, and this word-processing program I'm using - the one I, like many others, preferred because my budget didn't stretch the extra few grand when I was buying my laptop - infringes to the tune of 45. An "assortment" of other free and open source (FOSS) programs leaves me on the wrong side of another 68 patents. My e-mail client? Fifteen.
Patent infringements?
Although this is the first time Microsoft has nailed down exactly how many infringements FOSS allegedly makes into its territory, quite where the offending infringements might be found remains a secret. This, it seems, is "lest FOSS advocates start filing challenges to them", as Microsoft licensing boss, Horacio Gutierrez, is reported to have stated. In other words, it's Microsoft's ball and they're going home.
While many observers believe this is little more than a bit of sabre-rattling to go with reports of the bizarre statements of platform strategist Bill Hilf that, not only is free software dead, but "Linux doesn't exist in 2007" (making it the Schr"odinger's Cat of the software world, given that I surely can't have imagined booting into it this morning), it adds an interesting context to Redmond's recent agreements with Novell and others.
Those 'friendly' mutual agreements not to sue each other for as-yet-unspecified patent infringements that the socks-and-sandals-wearing, lentil-consuming free software nuts were so wrong to express concern about. Yes, those ones.
Hello world
It's hard to blame the developers of the world's most popular operating system for reaching out to embrace, extend and exterminate me for exercising my right to choose the software I use. It's even harder to blame them for flexing their muscles in a legal environment where, it seems, patents can be granted for anything from describing the lifting of a toilet seat to a business process.
Somewhere out there, there's probably a tycoon in-the-making, sitting on the code that kicks out "Hello World!" a hundred times. Aspiring young computer programmers should give up now, as should Linus, Bill and Steve who must surely have built their entire careers on this prior art.
I don't want to live in a world where I can only use one vendor or service provider for any given product.
Pamela Weaver, group senior writer, ITWeb
As someone once said, hard cases make bad law. But bad law also makes for some very hard cases. I have no problem with anyone, anywhere, making money. I admire those who have the intelligence and imagination to innovate new products, services and ideas. But if any one of those people claims they never once drew on the work or ideas of another person in producing their magnum opus, I don't believe them.
Maybe Microsoft does hold patents to code in my operating system/word processor/geeky USB watch. But anyone who's ever noticed the similarities between apparently different operating systems must surely feel there's no small amount of irony floating around this debate.
If we lock down every last scrap of code, we lock down software and all its applications. I don't know about you, but I don't want to live in a world where I can only use one vendor or service provider for any given product.
Microsoft's ball
Yes, there are people out there who engage in Microsoft-bashing for the sake of it. But maybe Microsoft should weigh up the value in all of this - people don't like to be pushed around or have their hands forced. Nobody likes to be threatened with unspecified legal action, and nothing can eat into your market-share like bad public perception.
Like many Linux users, I run a dual-boot machine. Every time I start up my computer, I choose whether to use Linux or my paid-for copy of Windows XP. I base my choice around anything from my mood to the task at hand. I don't have anything against Microsoft, or Apple, but I'll be damned if some big company's going to tell me I've got to pay them, whether I use their products or not.
In the meantime, it's Microsoft's ball, and they're going home. But will we be allowed to buy another one and resume play? Maybe they need to show us exactly which parts of the ball are theirs before we make any decisions...
Related column:
Does MS want to commit patent suicide?