To be completely honest, I’m not quite sure what to make of Microsoft’s latest IP deal, this time with Amazon centering on the Kindle e-reader. While I’ve spent the last few years highlighting how Microsoft’s IP licensing strategy is more about IP licensing strategy and less about tearing down Linux and open source software, the latest confidential deal seems to whip up the role of Linux and open source in the agreement.

First, I think there needs to be some clarification on these deals. One of the reasons I’ve argued they are more about IP licensing and less about targeting Linux and open source is the sheer volume of deals Microsoft has done since it initiated this strategy in late 2003: more than 600. Among the licensees are some Linux and open source-focused vendors, but only Novell is an open source-centered company on the list, which also includes Apple, HP, LG Electronics, Nikon, Pentax, Pioneer and Samsung.

Second, let’s use the TomTom suit — which indeed involved Microsoft’s FAT patents and TomTom’s implementation of Linux — as an example. In that case, we saw Microsoft focusing more on the embedded device market and potential licensing revenue than on making a point to involve Linux and open source software, both in comments to the press and in a press release on the matter, which makes no mention at all of Linux or open source. Despite the assumed and/or intended effort toward FUD over Linux with the TomTom suit, which was eventually settled, I stand by my earlier contention that the impact was minimal either way.

Then there was another IP deal between Microsoft and Melco Group, maker of the Buffalo NAS software. Didn’t know they were a Linux company? Neither did I, and I get paid to cover Linux and open source software in the industry. The point is that if we consider Melco Group a Linux company, then we can also assume the same for nearly every single hosting company, telecommunications company, set-top box manufacturer, satellite TV service operator, printer maker, navigational device manufacturer, server performance vendor, HPC clustering specialist, cloud computing player or any number of others I’m leaving out.

So I had grown accustomed to the pattern of: Microsoft IP deal with companyXYZ; now find the Linux or open source piece; now proclaim the war is on. I had also grown tired of proclamations that Linux and its developers and its users and its future were on the line, and was ready to take the advice of Linux Foundation Executive Director Jim Zemlin not to rubberneck on this one, either.

But now, I’m beginning to question why Linux and open source get such prominent mention in the press release on this latest deal with Amazon. Others have questioned why Amazon would agree to such a deal, and while I believe it’s often a reality of best interest/better than court, I also question how far any attempt at FUD can really travel in an industry that has largely already made its decision on Linux. For the most part and in most every case, the benefits outweigh the risks, whether they be real or perceived.