Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 18th Jul 2007 22:09 UTC, submitted by Kishe
Permalink for comment 256379
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 22:43 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 21:50 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:15 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:11 UTC, submitted by Drumhellar
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 21:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 7:37 UTC
Linked by fran on 05/18/13 1:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/17/13 23:35 UTC, submitted by kragil
Linked by MOS6510 on 05/17/13 22:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/17/13 22:15 UTC, submitted by Tom
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2007-02-17
The problem with this is that Microsoft have already signed a deal with these companies which indemnifies the customers of those comapnies ... and the deal that Microsoft signed makes no mention at all of GPL v3 as far as we know.
In other words, the existing signed deal does not force this conundrum on to the Linux companies ... as far as we know the Linux companies (especially SuSe) are perfectly free to release gplv3 code and still fully expect Microsoft to abide by their agreement.
Microsoft are desperately trying to back out of these deals. It remains to be seen if they are actually able to.
As you say, too funny.
Edited 2007-07-19 03:29