New Microsoft-funded study finds developers don't want GPL to cover patent deals
Microsoft is expending an awful lot of time and energy to try to derail the next version of the Free Software Foundation's General Public License (GPL). — On May 22, yet another in a long line …
Context & Ripple Effects
This lands nine days after Fortune's report that Microsoft claims open-source software infringes its patents, a story that put the company in direct conflict with the Free Software Foundation just as the GPLv3 draft was being finalized. On May 22 the response takes an academic form: a Microsoft-funded Harvard Business School study by Alan MacCormack arguing that developers themselves do not want the GPL extended to cover patent deals.
The framing is contested on arrival — Ars Technica calls it a questionable study attacking the GPL 3 draft process — but the syndication reach is real, with ZDNet picking up Microsoft's parallel assurance that it will not sue over Linux patents for now. The company is simultaneously alleging infringement, disclaiming imminent litigation, and funding research into what developers want from the license.
First-order effects
- The FSF's GPLv3 drafting process gains a well-funded counter-narrative at the worst possible moment, letting Microsoft argue through survey data rather than its own commercial interest.
- Developers and distributors being surveyed must judge the patent-protection clauses knowing the study behind the question was commissioned by the party those clauses target.
Second-order effects
- Vendors weighing patent agreements with Microsoft get analytical cover: if the findings hold, customers are said not to punish such deals even under GPLv3, eroding the draft clause's deterrent value.
- Microsoft's confirmed posture — alleging Linux patent infringement while committing to no immediate litigation — sustains pressure on distributors at near-zero cost to itself.
Third-order effects
- If corporate-commissioned research becomes routine ammunition in license-governance fights, the credibility of developer surveys turns into contested ground alongside the license text itself.
- Should GPLv3 still bar patent deals once finalized, the pattern points toward Microsoft-style agreements migrating into individually negotiated contracts outside GPL-covered distribution channels.
The trend: The battle over open-source licensing is shifting from code and legal threats to persuasion, with funded research deployed directly against license drafts.