[NTLUG:Discuss] IP idemnification - a concern?

[Leroy Tennison]

Robert Citek wrote:

>
> Saw this on another list and was just wondering if this is a  
> legitimate concern, fear mongering, or extortion?
>
> <quote>
> Q.  What is intellectual property (IP) indemnification as it relates  
> to software?
> A.  IP indemnification is about software makers protecting their  
> customers from legal costs and damages suffered as a result of  
> litigation brought on by IP infringement — a lawsuit filed against  
> the software user for violation of a patent, trade secret, copyright,  
> or trademark. But to truly assess the risk involved, users need to  
> consider a broader view of IP indemnification. They need to consider  
> a vendor's IP management practices, including
> indemnification; internal IP management processes; how the vendor  
> engages in IP protection; and the vendor's IP trade practices. While  
> it's tempting to equate IP indemnification as an issue between  
> conventionally licensed software versus open source software, that's  
> definitely not the case. Users should examine the indemnification  
> policies of every software vendor because any vendor may do a good or  
> poor job of protecting its customers.
> </quote>
>
>   http://download.microsoft.com/download/d/9/1/d911a75c- 
> deda-4531-8660-ff2daab6dc6d/IDCConnect.pdf
>
> I would imagine an IT manager's reaction would be, "we can't use Open  
> Source because it might expose us to IP litigation."  Is that an  
> accurate conclusion?
>
> Regards,
> - Robert
> http://www.cwelug.org/downloads
> Help others get OpenSource software.  Distribute FLOSS
> for Windows, Linux, *BSD, and MacOS X with BitTorrent
>
> _______________________________________________
> https://ntlug.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>
>
Can you spell FUD?  Sure you can!  Everyone should check the licensing 
to make sure they are legal but this seems to be overblown.  Open Source 
means Open Licensing (in the sense that you should be able to read it 
for yourself).  I could argue that, because of this, you are better off 
with Open Source because you don't always know what your proprietary 
vendor has incorporated into their product.  Remember that feature in a 
late version of DOS that Microsoft had to replace because they lost the 
court case (I can't even remember what it was, just that they lost and 
had to change).  If you're going to rely a vendor's IP indemnification 
then you need to ask yourself "How financially capable are they?"