Skip to main content
  1. Home
  2. Computing
  3. Legacy Archives

Novell, Red Hat Win Joint Patent Battle

Add as a preferred source on Google

Back in 2007, an outfit called IP Innovation LLC filed a patent infringement lawsuit, claiming that Linux vendors were infringing on patents it owns—including U.S. patent 5,072,412 covering “User interface with multiple workspaces for sharing display system objects.” Now, a Texas jury has ruled in favor of Red Hat and Novell, finding the patents at the center of the suit was invalid because of extensive prior art.

Image used with permission by copyright holder

The case is notable not so much because the patent was defeated, but because Linux vendors who are serious rivals in the marketplace joined forces to fight the case. The victory is being hailed by the open source community as a major win—and yet more evidence that Linux can stand up to patent challenges. Red Hat and Novell were represented by the same legal team—surprising because Novell and Red Hat in many ways represent opposite ends of the open source community. For instance, Novell has entered into a broad patent agreement with Microsoft to protect its customers from any patent litigation Microsoft might bring against Linux. Red Hat has never made that kind of deal—and it’s been about four years since Novell signed on the dotted line and Microosft has yet to mount a direct patent challenge to Linux.

Recommended Videos

“This is the result we expected and we are gratified that the jury recognized the tremendous innovative value of open source software,” said Red Hat executive FP Michael Cunningham, in a statement. “The jury knocked out three invalid patents that were masquerading as new and important inventions, when they were not.”

The IP Innovation patents go all the way back to 1991—but IP Innovation didn’t come up with them on their own, instead buying them from Xerox. Red Hat and Novell were able to demonstrate substantial prior art that preceded Xerox’s original patent filings: one of the requirements for patent protection is that the application must describe a new method or process that did not previously exist.

“We are very pleased that the jury reached a verdict in favor of Linux and of open source,” said Novell’s VP for legal affairs Jim Lundberg, in a statement. “We hope this verdict sends a strong and unequivocal message to others that Novell and the open source community will vigorously defend any unsupported attacks on Linux and on open source innovation. ”

Geoff Duncan
Former Contributor
Geoff Duncan writes, programs, edits, plays music, and delights in making software misbehave. He's probably the only member…
AI is finding Apple security flaws faster than Apple can sort through them
Apple has limited how many bug reports researchers can keep open as AI tools produce both genuine Mac vulnerabilities and a flood of questionable submissions
Lighting, Architecture, Building

Apple has capped the number of security reports researchers can keep open at once after AI bug hunting put its review process under pressure, according to the Financial Times.

Some submissions describe hallucinated or purely theoretical risks. Others uncover vulnerabilities serious enough to require patches. Bynario told the FT that it found more than 50 possible macOS flaws in three weeks, including a privilege-escalation chain that could give an attacker full control of a Mac.

Read more
Anthropic is paying $1.5 billion over pirated books, but it can still legally cut up purchased ones
The settlement addressed unauthorized ebook downloads, not the destructive scanning of lawfully bought physical copies, a distinction now alarming booksellers
Book, Publication, Indoors

A federal judge has approved Anthropic’s $1.5 billion settlement over nearly half a million pirated books. The same litigation also protected a more physical method of feeding its AI systems. Anthropic bought print books, removed their bindings, scanned every page and destroyed the originals.

The legal divide came down to acquisition. The settlement covers books downloaded from LibGen and PiLiMi, while the court treated Anthropic’s one-for-one conversion of purchased books into private digital files as fair use. Training AI models on lawfully acquired material was also considered transformative.

Read more
Google Earth’s AI misadventure lasted only a day. It was a tale of dangerous ignorance.
Nuclear reactors, tanks, and historical destruction on a life-like satellite map? Yeah, that's bad.
Nano Banana AI image generator representation.

Technology behemoths are clearly not reading the room, or they are just moving faster than they should when it comes to AI deployment. Google has already stuffed its Gemini AI in every corner of its software stack, from Android to daily productivity tools like Gmail that are used by hundreds of millions of users every day. AI is everywhere. Not all of it is bad, mind you. But in a few places, it just feels forced.

In its latest AI-fication experiment, the company targeted Google Earth. The idea was to let the audience use its Nano Banana 2 AI image generator and make images that can be placed on the map view. On paper, it's a cool idea. What would the Colosseum of Rome look like in your urban neighborhood? Yeah, fun stuff like that.

Read more