Re: [zfs-discuss] NetApp/Oracle-Sun lawsuit done
Run away! Run fast little Netapp. Don't anger the sleeping giant - Oracle! David Magda wrote: Seems that things have been cleared up: NetApp (NASDAQ: NTAP) today announced that both parties have agreed to dismiss their pending patent litigation, which began in 2007 between Sun Microsystems and NetApp. Oracle and NetApp seek to have the lawsuits dismissed without prejudice. The terms of the agreement are confidential. http://tinyurl.com/39qkzgz http://www.netapp.com/us/company/news/news-rel-20100909-oracle-settlement.html A recap of the history at: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/09/09/oracle_netapp_zfs_dismiss/ ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss -- Craig Cory Senior Instructor :: ExitCertified : Sun Certified System Administrator : Sun Certified Network Administrator : Sun Certified Security Administrator : Veritas Certified Instructor 8950 Cal Center Drive Bldg 1, Suite 110 Sacramento, California 95826 [e] craig.c...@exitcertified.com [p] 916.669.3970 [f] 916.669.3977 +-+ ExitCertified :: Excellence in IT Certified Education Certified training with Oracle, Sun Microsystems, Apple, Symantec, IBM, Red Hat, MySQL, Hitachi Storage, SpringSource and VMWare. 1.800.803.EXIT (3948) | www.ExitCertified.com +-+ ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] NetApp/Oracle-Sun lawsuit done
Seems that things have been cleared up: NetApp (NASDAQ: NTAP) today announced that both parties have agreed to dismiss their pending patent litigation, which began in 2007 between Sun Microsystems and NetApp. Oracle and NetApp seek to have the lawsuits dismissed without prejudice. The terms of the agreement are confidential. http://tinyurl.com/39qkzgz http://www.netapp.com/us/company/news/news-rel-20100909-oracle-settlement.html A recap of the history at: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/09/09/oracle_netapp_zfs_dismiss/ ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] NetApp/Oracle-Sun lawsuit done
This is welcome news. -- richard On Sep 9, 2010, at 9:38 AM, David Magda wrote: Seems that things have been cleared up: NetApp (NASDAQ: NTAP) today announced that both parties have agreed to dismiss their pending patent litigation, which began in 2007 between Sun Microsystems and NetApp. Oracle and NetApp seek to have the lawsuits dismissed without prejudice. The terms of the agreement are confidential. http://tinyurl.com/39qkzgz http://www.netapp.com/us/company/news/news-rel-20100909-oracle-settlement.html A recap of the history at: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/09/09/oracle_netapp_zfs_dismiss/ -- OpenStorage Summit, October 25-27, Palo Alto, CA http://nexenta-summit2010.eventbrite.com ZFS and performance consulting http://www.RichardElling.com ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] NetApp/Oracle-Sun lawsuit done
On 9/9/2010 10:25 AM, Richard Elling wrote: This is welcome news. -- richard On Sep 9, 2010, at 9:38 AM, David Magda wrote: Seems that things have been cleared up: NetApp (NASDAQ: NTAP) today announced that both parties have agreed to dismiss their pending patent litigation, which began in 2007 between Sun Microsystems and NetApp. Oracle and NetApp seek to have the lawsuits dismissed without prejudice. The terms of the agreement are confidential. http://tinyurl.com/39qkzgz http://www.netapp.com/us/company/news/news-rel-20100909-oracle-settlement.html A recap of the history at: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/09/09/oracle_netapp_zfs_dismiss Yes, it's welcome to get it over with. I do get to bitch about one aspect here of the US civil legal system, though. If you've gone so far as to burn our (the public's) time and money to file a lawsuit, you shouldn't be able to seal up the court transcript, or have a non-public settlement. Call it the price you pay for wasting our time (i.e. the court system's time). -- Erik Trimble Java System Support Mailstop: usca22-123 Phone: x17195 Santa Clara, CA Timezone: US/Pacific (GMT-0800) ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] NetApp/Oracle-Sun lawsuit done
On Thu, 9 Sep 2010, Erik Trimble wrote: Yes, it's welcome to get it over with. I do get to bitch about one aspect here of the US civil legal system, though. If you've gone so far as to burn our (the public's) time and money to file a lawsuit, you shouldn't be able to seal up the court transcript, or have a non-public settlement. Call it the price you pay for wasting our time (i.e. the court system's time). Unfortunately, this may just be a case of Oracle's patents vs NetApp's patents. Oracle obviously holds a lot of patents and could counter-sue using one of its own patents. Oracle's handshake agreement with NetApp does not in any way shield other zfs commercial users from a patent lawsuit from NetApp. Bob -- Bob Friesenhahn bfrie...@simple.dallas.tx.us, http://www.simplesystems.org/users/bfriesen/ GraphicsMagick Maintainer,http://www.GraphicsMagick.org/ ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] NetApp/Oracle-Sun lawsuit done
dm == David Magda dma...@ee.ryerson.ca writes: dm http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/09/09/oracle_netapp_zfs_dismiss/ http://www.groklaw.net/articlebasic.php?story=20050121014650517 says when the MPL was modified to become the CDDL, clauses were removed which would have required Oracle to disclose any patent licenses it might have negotiated with NetApp covering CDDL code. The disclosure would have to be added to hg, freeze or no: ``If Contributor obtains such knowledge after the Modification is made available as described in Section 3.2, Contributor shall promptly modify the LEGAL file in all copies Contributor makes available thereafter and shall take other steps (such as notifying appropriate mailing lists or newsgroups) reasonably calculated to inform those who received the Covered Code that new knowledge has been obtained.'' This is in MPL but removed from CDDL. The groklaw poster's concern is that this is a mechanism through which Oracle could manoever to make the CDDL worthless as a guarantee of zfs users' software freedom. CDDL does implicitly grant rights to Oracle's patents, but not to negotiations for shield from NetApp's. AIUI GPLv3 is different and does not have this problem, though I don't understand it well so I could be wrong. With MPL at least we would know about the negotiations: the settlement was ``secret'' which is exactly the disaster scenario the groklaw poster warned of. I'm sorry you cannot be uninterested in licenses and ``just want to get work done.'' To me it looks like the patent situation is mostly an obstacle to getting ZFS development funded. If you used ZFS secretly in some kind of cloud service, and never told anyone about it, you could be pretty certain of getting away with it without any patent claims throughout the entire decade or so that ZFS remains relevant, but if you want to participate in a horizontally-divided market like Coraid, or otherwise share source changes, you might get sued. This regime has to be a huge drag on the industry, and it makes things really unpredictable which has to discourage investment, and it strongly favours large companies. pgpLRI59okaob.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] NetApp/Oracle-Sun lawsuit done
On 9/9/2010 11:11 AM, Garrett D'Amore wrote: On Thu, 2010-09-09 at 12:58 -0500, Bob Friesenhahn wrote: On Thu, 9 Sep 2010, Erik Trimble wrote: Yes, it's welcome to get it over with. I do get to bitch about one aspect here of the US civil legal system, though. If you've gone so far as to burn our (the public's) time and money to file a lawsuit, you shouldn't be able to seal up the court transcript, or have a non-public settlement. Call it the price you pay for wasting our time (i.e. the court system's time). Unfortunately, this may just be a case of Oracle's patents vs NetApp's patents. Oracle obviously holds a lot of patents and could counter-sue using one of its own patents. Oracle's handshake agreement with NetApp does not in any way shield other zfs commercial users from a patent lawsuit from NetApp. True. But, I wonder if the settlement sets a precedent? Certainly the lack of a successful lawsuit has *failed* to set any precedent conclusively indicating that NetApp has enforceable patents where ZFS is concerned. IANAL, but it seems like if Oracle and NetApp were to reach some kind of licensing arrangement, then it might be construed to be anticompetitive if NetApp were to fail to offer similar licensing arrangements to downstream consumers? Does anyone know if there is any basis for such a theory, or are these just my idle imaginings? As far as I know, Nexenta has not been approached by NetApp. I'd like to see what happens with Coraid ... but ultimately those conversations are between Coraid and NetApp. - Garrett This is *exactly* the reason I advocate forced public settlement agreements. If you've availed yourself of the court system, you should be obligated to put into the public record any agreement reached, just as if you had gotten a verdict. It would help prevent a lot of the cross-licensing discrimination due to secrecy. Oh well. -- Erik Trimble Java System Support Mailstop: usca22-123 Phone: x17195 Santa Clara, CA Timezone: US/Pacific (GMT-0800) ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] NetApp/Oracle-Sun lawsuit done
On Thu, 9 Sep 2010, Garrett D'Amore wrote: True. But, I wonder if the settlement sets a precedent? No precedent has been set. Certainly the lack of a successful lawsuit has *failed* to set any precedent conclusively indicating that NetApp has enforceable patents where ZFS is concerned. Right. IANAL, but it seems like if Oracle and NetApp were to reach some kind of licensing arrangement, then it might be construed to be anticompetitive if NetApp were to fail to offer similar licensing arrangements to downstream consumers? Does anyone know if there is any basis for such a theory, or are these just my idle imaginings? Idle imaginings. A patent holder is not compelled to license use of the patent to anyone else, and can be selective regarding who gets a license. As far as I know, Nexenta has not been approached by NetApp. I'd like to see what happens with Coraid ... but ultimately those conversations are between Coraid and NetApp. There should be little doubt that NetApp's goal was to make money by suing Sun. Nexenta does not have enough income/assets to make a risky lawsuit worthwhile. Bob -- Bob Friesenhahn bfrie...@simple.dallas.tx.us, http://www.simplesystems.org/users/bfriesen/ GraphicsMagick Maintainer,http://www.GraphicsMagick.org/ ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] NetApp/Oracle-Sun lawsuit done
From: zfs-discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org [mailto:zfs-discuss- boun...@opensolaris.org] On Behalf Of Bob Friesenhahn There should be little doubt that NetApp's goal was to make money by suing Sun. Nexenta does not have enough income/assets to make a risky lawsuit worthwhile. But in all likelihood, Apple still won't touch ZFS. Apple would be worth suing. A big fat juicy... On interesting take-away point, however: Oracle is now in a solid position to negotiate with Apple. If Apple wants to pay for ZFS and indemnification against netapp lawsuit, Oracle can grant it. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] NetApp/Oracle-Sun lawsuit done
On Thu, Sep 9, 2010 at 2:49 PM, Bob Friesenhahn bfrie...@simple.dallas.tx.us wrote: On Thu, 9 Sep 2010, Garrett D'Amore wrote: True. But, I wonder if the settlement sets a precedent? No precedent has been set. Certainly the lack of a successful lawsuit has *failed* to set any precedent conclusively indicating that NetApp has enforceable patents where ZFS is concerned. Right. IANAL, but it seems like if Oracle and NetApp were to reach some kind of licensing arrangement, then it might be construed to be anticompetitive if NetApp were to fail to offer similar licensing arrangements to downstream consumers? Does anyone know if there is any basis for such a theory, or are these just my idle imaginings? Idle imaginings. A patent holder is not compelled to license use of the patent to anyone else, and can be selective regarding who gets a license. As far as I know, Nexenta has not been approached by NetApp. I'd like to see what happens with Coraid ... but ultimately those conversations are between Coraid and NetApp. There should be little doubt that NetApp's goal was to make money by suing Sun. Nexenta does not have enough income/assets to make a risky lawsuit worthwhile. There should be little doubt it's a complete waste of money for NetApp go to court with a second party when the outcome of their primary lawsuit will determine the outcome of the second. They had absolutely nothing to gain by suing Nexenta if they still had a pending lawsuit with Sun. Furthermore, unless you work as legal counsel for Nexenta, I'd say you have absolutely no clue whether or not they received a cease and desist from NetApp. I *STRONGLY* doubt the goal was money for NetApp. They've got that coming out of their ears. It was either cross licensing issues (almost assuredly this), or a hope to stop/slow down ZFS. If they had, I strongly doubt it's something they would want to publicize. It wouldn't exactly give potential customers the warm and fuzzies. --Tim ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
