-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
SFLC: Microsoft violated the GPL
,----[ Quote ]
| Microsoft violated the General Public License v2 (GPLv2) when it distributed
| its Hyper-V Linux Integration Components (LinuxIC) without providing source
| code, says the Software Freedom Law Center (SFLC).
|
| The violation was rectified when Microsoft contributed more than 20,000 lines
| of source code to the Linux community last week. The drivers are designed to
| improve the performance of the Linux operating system when it is virtualized
| on the Windows Server 2008 Hyper-V hypervisor-based virtualization system.
|
| [...]
|
| "It seems to me that Sam [Ramji] is likely correct when he says that talk
| inside Microsoft about releasing the source was under way before the Linux
| developers began their enforcement effort," said Bradley Kuhn, a policy
| analyst and tech director at the SFLC.
|
| "However, that talk doesn't mean that there wasn't a problem. As soon as one
| distributes the binaries of a GPL'd work, one must provide the source for
| those binaries, so Microsoft's delay in this regard was a GPL violation.
|
| "The important thing to note from a perspective of freedom is that this
| software, whether it is released properly under the GPL or kept proprietary
| in violation of the GPL, is a piece of software designed to convince people
| to give up free virtualization platforms like Xen and KVM, and [to] use
| Microsoft's virtualization technology instead," Kuhn added.
`----
http://www.sdtimes.com/content/article.aspx?ArticleID=33641
We should 'thank' Microsoft for a Linus Trojan.
Recent:
FSF on Microsoft’s “Empty Promise”
,----[ Quote ]
| Now I’ve been preaching this gospel since Day 1. It is pure dishonesty to
| pretend like every company present the same risk and hostility to Linux, Free
| Software, or Open Source that Microsoft does. Microsoft’s hostility and
| desire to destroy Linux is not the fevered imaginations of wild-eyed zealots.
| It is documented. It is proven. It is inarguable.
|
| Now, you may want to advance the idea that Microsoft has changed. That is a
| possibility, sure – but it is not documented, proven or inarguable. The safe
| and sane position towards Microsoft is suspicion and wariness. Microsoft made
| it so, not wild-eyed zealots. It also becomes on open question on what type
| of change it is.
`----
http://mono-nono.com/2009/07/20/fsf-on-microsofts-empty-promise/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
iEYEARECAAYFAkpvBrMACgkQU4xAY3RXLo7Y2ACcDk3e5A9EZkWt9fGjBLHwa79t
pz4An3gx7vUmtZ//5eWdKV9d+1EKI1e7
=JUwH
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
|
|
