Comment Articles

A Tale Of Two Michaels

Rupert Goodwins ZDNet.co.uk

Published: 20 Jan 2004 14:45 GMT

The result is that IBM no longer looks like a bully, but retains a fearsome reputation for fighting its corner. It might have lost a few defensible million dollars over the years, but it saves on the court costs, reduces the chances of a perverse ruling that does disproportionate damage, and it keeps control of its IP no matter what. People approach it with reasonable intent, and are not disappointed.

Now, let's see what Microsoft has done with MikeRoweSoft. Microsoft offered ten dollars, which is an insult in anyone's language. He wanted ten thousand -- and Microsoft made the decision that it was right, he was wrong and he could go to hell in a hand basket. It's not as if he is being malicious or deceitful, nor as if there are a thousand Mike Rowes lining up to drain Microsoft of its petty cash. Public opinion is not with Microsoft on this. Does the company really want the same rap as the RIAA, which will forever be known as the mob who put the heat on a 12-year-old girl? Is ten thousand dollars worth more than that?

Meanwhile, back in the world of thousand-dollar suits running million-dollar suits, Microsoft ain't doing so well. Although it's vowed to carry on fighting, court after court has agreed that it violated a 1994 patent about browsers dealing with embedded components in Web pages. The damages are set at around half a billion dollars, and the winner -- Eolas Technologies, otherwise known as Michael Doyle -- looks set to collect.

There have been worries that this is an example of one person holding a whole industry to ransom: after all, despite everything there are more browsers out there than just Internet Explorer and all of them do the same trick. Many gallons of bile have been spilled online, portraying Doyle as the Evil Destroyer seeking personal enrichment, careless of the destruction his greed will bring.

Things are not as they seem. Doyle is not only on record as being in favour of open source, he is a developer on the open source tcl language and co-author of a book on the subject. He's said that he's "working with" those in the community who are affected by the patent, and shows no signs of wanting to be a disruptive influence. Clearly, here is a reasonable person. There must be something about Microsoft that particularly rankles reasonable people, and I bet both Mikes know what it is. Could Microsoft have saved a lot of money and a lot of very bad press if it had a better reputation for being worth dealing with?

It's not that this is Doyle's only brush with IP and big guys. When he started Eolas, he concocted a nice little logo -- a stylised swoosh of a lower case e morphed with an @ sign -- which proved so attractive to someone else that they, shall we say, came to a reasonable agreement. But then the recipient, IBM, has learned that reasonable is worth every penny.