GOLD PLATED IT management guidance firm Gartner Group has warned its subscribers that Microsoft's documentation "openness" pledge is a patent trap.

In a research report, Gartner analysts said that developers should be aware of potential legal risks attached to using Microsoft documentation for commercial software development. Gartner advised, "Do not use Microsoft's documentation unless you have rigorous processes to keep track of applicable patents."

It might just as well have said not to use Microsoft's documentation at all, or cautioned its readers to employ rigorous clean-room development or reverse engineering methods instead. Few firms can afford to track the Vole's patents.

In a belated effort to appease the European Commission and burnish its image ahead of the second round of ISO board votes on its OOXML document formats, Microsoft announced last week that it would publish more than 30,000 pages of technical documentation.

Simultaneously, the Vole also issued its Patent Pledge for Open Source Developers, ostensibly promising not to sue open source developers who refer to its technology in developing non-commercial software.

Actually, the Vole's new found, so-called "openness" and patent pledge are more about Microsoft threatening lawsuits for patent infringement against any open source developers who use its documentation and whose software ever finds its way into commercial products.

The way Gartner put it was to caution that commercial open source developers who refer to Microsoft's documentation will need to licence Microsoft's patents.

It warned that even non-commercial open source development could be at risk, if the software ever appears in commercial products. "Keep all [open source] work that depends on these patents separate from [commercial] work, to avoid exposing downstream developers and users to litigation risk," Gartner wrote.

It would appear that Gartner is suggesting that Microsoft is attempting to poison the well of open source software development and open source interoperability.

However, whether or not Microsoft actually has any valid patents isn't known, because the company refuses to specify exactly what patents it claims or what technologies they allegedly cover.

The Vole is obviously terrified that many of its precious software patents can't survive scrutiny, either before the US Patent and Trademark Office or in courts of law. That's the only credible explanation for its consistent refusal to specify them, because, were it confident about their validity, it would openly disclose its patent numbers and whatever software products and documentation they cover.

Furthermore, all of Microsoft's software patents might be easy to work around.

So it's not clear that Microsoft's campaign to shift the definition of open source software to restrict it to exclusively apply to non-commercial applications will be successful. But in its recent report, Gartner's seemingly willing to go along. µ

L'Inq
InformationWeek