Open source software isn’t exactly the same as FREE software but from the perspective of most business users, they look darn close to the same. The new version of the GPL (see the previous article) seems to take a pretty hard swipe at anyone who wants to license patented technology and use it in their release of software.
One of the big users may be anyone that would have benefitted from the Microsoft-Novell deal.
It’s interesting that Microsoft has JUST published the claim that 200+ of its patents are infringed by open-source code. GPLv3 means–apparently–that Microsoft wouldn’t be able to press patent claims against anyone using software distributed under the Microsoft-Novell deal. And that–apparently–applies even if the person or company in question didn’t get the software through “approved” channels….like Novell or Microsoft.
I’m not a lawyer, but to me as a business person, this looks like it might be bad from a lot of perspectives. I think I understand why the Free Software Foundation (FSF) included these provisions in the GPLv3 license, but it seems there would be a way to allow the partnership between Microsoft and Novell.
All of this comes, I think, from the fact that a lot of the open-source community is somewhat “counter-cultural” at least from the perspective of the big company like Microsoft. You can see this–for example–in the Linux release of the browser FireFox. Evidently, there are some intellectual property rights surrounding part of the FireFox name or logo, so the Linux version is IceWeasel. Clever, I guess. But intended to poke a bit of fun at intellectual property rights which many open-source fans see as “foolish” or “exploitative.”
At this point, I think FSF is happy that this throws a monkey wrench into Microsoft and Novell’s plans…after all, they may represent the “evil empire.”
Microsoft Would Lose Patent Rights Under New Linux License Terms — Microsoft — InformationWeek

Ok, so you may have guessed that I’m on a Linux tear. That is, I’m doing a lot of thinking and research about Linux. Thus far, I know I can install it much easier today than 2-3 years ago. I know that some stuff still isn’t ready for prime time (like support of Wireless Networking, which is the only thing that won’t work on the laptop I’ve installed it on to play with), and some things are still developing (like ERP software for Linux).
All of this aside, I’m also learning a lot of terminology, most of which consists in trying to learn how to pronounce words. For example, I’ve learned that ET-see is the way you pronounce the file system directory /etc. This is where all the configuration stuff is.
The biggest battle, though is pronouncing the names of the “distributions” of Linux. Names like Debian (DEE-bee-un) and ubuntu (ooh-BOON-too). Red Hat I can handle. SUSE (SOO-SUH), and others.
The concept of a “distribution” is a bit dense for some people. You may be asking, “Isn’t Linux LINUX?” Well, no, and–well–yes. The core of Linux (the kernel) is pretty much the same. But it’s the things that are packaged with that kernel (like the Accessories in Windows…you know, the little calculator and WordPad, etc.) that are different. Some distributions are designed to be small and minimalist. Some distributions are designed to have “everything” (like Debian).
And some distributions–like Red Hat–have been around for a while and have options for support contracts. Other distributions are by some gal (or guy) in her (or his) garage…
All in all, they are a lot alike, and today’s Linux can be installed by a novice (the installation program will ask you questions that you don’t understand and don’t have a clue what the best answer is, but if you just pick one, you’ll probably wind up with something that works.) On my laptop–purchased for price not for features without checking the hardware compatibility list–Debian installed first time, without issues.
Now comes the hard part…
The State of Ubuntu 7.04 Is Strong

I taught a class on disaster recovery a couple of years ago. It was interesting to see how few of the people who attended the class had actually thought about disaster recovery from a systems standpoint.
Having a good backup isn’t the end of disaster recovery, though it’s a start. And computer systems aren’t the only thing that has to be recovered from a disaster, but they are more and more important in business.
As the article below from CIO Insight notes, it’s not good enough to have a plan, you actually have to test it and then re-test it. I’m doing more and more work on our disaster recovery planning here at DGG. How about you?
Some things you might think about:

• How much does your insurance policy really cover? I found out recently that hardware and software is covered by our policy, but not data. Also, our business continuity policy used to cover only events that occurred on our business premises. So if the building was destroyed, that was covered. If a tornado tore out the infrastructure that supplies the electricity to the building, that wouldn’t have been covered.
• Are you backing up all the data you need? We’ve tended to insist on full backups with systems we setup, but we’ve seen systems where files were backed up selectively (so they took up less space on the backup media). That’s OK as long as you’re sure the files you backup are the ones you need.
• What would you do if your building was destroyed along with all its contents? Do you have an off-site backup? Where?
• What would you do in the event of “the big one” that destroys most of the city you live in. Here in Memphis, for example, we worry about an earthquake, since we sit on a fault line
• Do you need redundant data centers? That is, do you need a computer somewhere else that has the ability to continue to operate your company in the event of a total failure in your location?

These are some really basic questions, but think a bit about them. You may be frightened by what you learn.
Survey: Many Backup/Recovery Systems Going Untested

I know from my business law course that you can’t just say anything about anybody without repercussions. There are slander and libel laws, though I can never keep up with which one is in print and which one is verbal.
Turns out that there are a number of other important laws that every blogger needs to know about. The Aviva Directory posted the “12 Important U.S. Laws Every Blogger Needs to Know.” The link below takes you directly to it.
Blog Law ｻ 12 Important U.S. Laws Every Blogger Needs to Know