Linked by David Adams on Thu 20th Nov 2008 04:26 UTC
Permalink for comment 337956
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 05/22/13 22:23 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 13:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 13:30 UTC, submitted by JRepin
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 22:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 21:45 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 15:53 UTC
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
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2005-12-02
"In contrast, the Microsoft covenant not to sue is a covenant not to sue Novell or Novell's customers."
Well, there actually is much more to it than that if you read the documents. Microsft has also pledged in those documents not to sue anyone who is a non-compensated developer, or anyone who contributes to the code used in OpenSuse. I would think that pretty much says they can't sue anyone. Personally I believe there is no difference between the 2 covenants. Of course, I have been wrong and certainly will be wrong on things to come. Who knows..I will start to worry if Microsoft does something they have never done before, which is sue someone for any type of patent infringement. I would like to point out that I despise software patents, and if they must exist, they should be subject to the same rules as patents on a physical item. Meaning schematics/blueprints must be submitted, and that is what is patented, not the idea itself. In other words, they should not exist.
http://www.microsoft.com/interop/msnovellcollab/community.mspx
EDIT: Added the link to the document.
Edited 2008-11-21 02:44 UTC