Home Messages Index
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index

Re: Microsoft's Scott Guthrie Lies About/Twists "Cross-platform" to Hijack Web

Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> espoused:
> ____/ Linonut on Monday 03 March 2008 16:46 : \____
> 
>> * Miguel de Icaza peremptorily fired off this memo:
>> 
>>>> What will be the terms for commercial usage of Mono?
>>>
>>> I refer you to our licensing page, or to the wikipedia for the gory
>>> details.
>> 
>> Thanks.
>> 
>>    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mono_(software)#License
>> 
>>    Developers contributing source code to Mono upstream must agree to
>>    distribute their code to Novell under a license that allows Novell to
>>    relicense the code under other licensing terms. This practice is
>>    similar to copyright assignment agreements used in other free and
>>    open source software projects (used in many GNU projects and by
>>    MySQL), however, this method allows the developer to retain
>>    copyright of the original work while still preserving Novell's
>>    ability to commercially license Mono for specific customers that
>>    require different licensing terms than what is provided in general
>>    release versions (such as running Mono in embedded firmware
>>    environments).
>> 
>>    . . .
>> 
>>    This has been summed up by Richard Stallman[8]:
>> 
>>        Mono is a free implementation of Microsoft's language C#.
>>        Microsoft has declared itself our enemy and we know that
>>        Microsoft is getting patents on some features of C#. So I think
>>        it's dangerous to use C#, and it may be dangerous to use Mono.
>>        There's nothing wrong with Mono. Mono is a free
>>        implementation of a language that users use. It's good to provide
>>        free implementations. We should have free implementations of
>>        every language. But, depending on it is dangerous, and we better
>>        not do that.
>> 
>>    On November 2, 2006, Microsoft and Novell announced a joint agreement
>>    whereby Microsoft agreed to not sue Novell's customers for
>>    patent infringement. According to Mono project leader Miguel de
>>    Icaza, this agreement extends to Mono but only for Novell
>>    developers and customers.
> 
> Tes, got to have some competitive advantage, hey? ;-) You know, keep those
> nasty Ubuntu feet on fire.
> 

Oh god, I'd no idea that the Mono licensing terms were so awful for the
authors of the code.  This is basically a BSD clause - you write, Novell
get to take the code and give you nothing back.  This is atrocious, and
I sincerely hope that nobody is stupid enough to contribute any code
under such conditions. 

-- 
| Mark Kent   --   mark at ellandroad dot demon dot co dot uk          |
| Cola faq:  http://www.faqs.org/faqs/linux/advocacy/faq-and-primer/   |
| Cola trolls:  http://colatrolls.blogspot.com/                        |
| My (new) blog:  http://www.thereisnomagic.org                        |

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index