MS on Copyleft and FOSS
,----[ Quote ]
| [Pamela Jones: I found this paper doing some research just now, and I
| wanted to show you what Microsoft thinks about the GPL and other copyleft
| licenses and the open source development model, or at least what
| it says about it. Notice that it is inaccurate as to signing off
| on code, particularly with respect to the GNU project, which has
| always required that, and the Linux kernel, which has a specific
| process Microsoft seems not to know about. On the other hand, he
| does understand that the GPL doesn't eat your code, that the GPL
| is a conditional license, not a contract, so that's a step in the
| right direction:]
|
| Pedigree Issues: The second and more subtle OSS issue is related
| to the "pedigree" of OSS code. Even if the OSS code is not governed
| by Copyleft license terms, it was likely developed by a dispersed
| group of developers who ultimately give no representations as to
| ownership and non-infringement of the finished product. The Open
| Source "Community" development model involves potentially large
| numbers of developers who are subject to little if any legal
| oversight and who may be involved in a host of projects, each
| governed by a different and potentially conflicting license.
| More importantly, the typical Community contributor has a
| day job at a technology company and is likely to have signed
| a broad employment agreement with his employer vesting
| ownership of intellectual property (including possibly the
| contributions made to the OSS project) with the employer.
| Given what we know about the Community development process
| and given the lack of warranties on OSS code, we have
| significant reservations about distributing such code.
|
| -Jim Markwith, Esq., Microsoft, "OSS Issues in Acquisitions an
| Other Inbound Transactions"
`----
http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/foi/images/3/3f/OSS_Issues_in_Acquisitions_and_Inbound_Transactions_01-05-07.pdf
|
|
