Opinion 2
Microsoft/Novell pact: Markets, One; government, Zero
By tom schatz
The recently-announced collaboration between Microsoft and Novell offers yet another reason to shun government intervention in the technology sector. The companies have agreed to improve interoperability between Microsoft Windows and Novell’s Linux operating system. The deal ensures that SuSE Linux software can operate with Windows, protects SuSE Linux customers from patent infringement suits, and protects both companies’ intellectual property.
Microsoft and Novell are rivals in the corporate server software business. Windows is proprietary and Novell’s SuSE Linux is open source, meaning its code can be freely modified and distributed by developers. Some open source advocates argue that proprietary software is anti-competitive and makes customers overly-dependent on a single vendor. Based on such arguments, Massachusetts is moving forward with an initiative to transition all government computers to open source operating systems.
The Microsoft-Novell deal should render that effort moot. Microsoft said the move was a response to corporate customers that desired an easier mix of Microsoft and Linux technologies. Government action was not necessary; the marketplace responded with a solution that met consumers’ demands for flexibility.
The voluntary agreement to share intellectual property stands in stark contrast to the effort by the European Commission (EC) to force Microsoft to share some of its trade secrets with competitors. In July 2006, the EC hit Microsoft with an unprecedented fine of 280.5 million euros ($357 million), or 1.5 million euros per day, retroactive to December 15, 2005. The fine was based on allegations that Microsoft was not disclosing and documenting Windows Server technology to rival companies. An earlier EC directive forced Microsoft to create two versions of the Windows, one with its music and video program, Media Player, and one without. There was virtually no demand for the unbundled version.
The EC debacle shows what happens when a government decides it can design software better than the marketplace: expensive lawsuits for taxpayers; inferior products for consumers; and a precedent for companies to battle for supremacy in the halls of government rather than in the free market.
Forcing a company to give up its intellectual property reduces the incentive to innovate for companies all over the world. The Bush Administration must reiterate to the EC that its actions hamper international trade and raise the cost of doing business. Likewise, Massachusetts does not need to establish a universal preference for open source, nor should any other state. Like all procurement decisions, the best policy is to place all products on equal footing in the ever-evolving software market.
Ultimately, the Microsoft-Novell collaboration is in the interests of consumers and taxpayers, and highlights the absurdity of the actions being taken by Massachusetts and the EC.
Tom Schatz is president of Citizens Against Government Waste, (www.cagw.org), a non-profit advocacy organization based in Washington DC.
1301 Connecticut Avenue, NW Suite 400 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 467-5300 media@cagw.org www.cagw.org
WBJ Web Partners
Most Recent
Most Recent
0 Comments