Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 6th Jul 2007 11:05 UTC, submitted by WillM
Microsoft Microsoft cleared the air July 5 on its obligations to GNU General Public License Version 3 support, declaring it will not provide support or updates for GPLv3 under the deal it penned in November with Novell to administer certificates for the Linux distribution. Microsoft also said July 5 that its agreement with Novell, as well as those with Linux rivals Xandros and Linspire, were unaffected by the release June 29 of GPLv3 by the Free Software Foundation.
Thread beginning with comment 253322
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Turn about...
by iskios on Fri 6th Jul 2007 11:28 UTC
iskios
Member since:
2005-07-06

The difference would be in proving to a judge that Microsoft knowingly accepted the terms of the license.

If you buy Windows and find you cannot accept the license, return it. (I think the license should be on the outside of packaging, since most places will not accept opened returns on software) But I think the idea of forcing a company to open source its software or code in this way is tantamount to a tyrannical takeover, and I find it a bit disturbing.

Reply Score: 5

RE: Turn about...
by KenJackson on Fri 6th Jul 2007 11:33 in reply to "Turn about..."
KenJackson Member since:
2005-07-18

But I think the idea of forcing a company to open source its software or code in this way is tantamount to a tyrannical takeover, and I find it a bit disturbing.

But it seems to be symmetrical. If I don't like the license that Microsoft uses, I take the software back. If Microsoft doesn't like the license that GNU software uses, it can chose to not do business. Neither of us should be able to just ignore the license.

Reply Parent Score: 5

If MS distributes the code
by 2fargone on Fri 6th Jul 2007 11:35 in reply to "Turn about..."
2fargone Member since:
2006-02-20

They are bound by the license if they distribute the code or they're guilty of copyright infringment. Other than that license, they have no other protection to distribute. This isn't a contract, MS doesn't have to accept the terms to anything, UNLESS, it distributes the code.

There is nothing distrubing about this other than MS thinks they can have their cake, and eat it too.

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE: Turn about...
by 2fargone on Fri 6th Jul 2007 18:04 in reply to "Turn about..."
2fargone Member since:
2006-02-20

I should also point out there is no code or software that's being opensourced. This is about patents.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE: Turn about...
by melkor on Sat 7th Jul 2007 00:07 in reply to "Turn about..."
melkor Member since:
2006-12-16

Huh? Microsoft didn't need to make a deal with Novell. It didn't need to make a deal with GNU GPL'd software. It was Microsoft's choice. Microsoft knows what the GPL is about, what it entails. It knows that you have to give back to the community from which you take. This is simply Microsoft arrogance. This will be part of a 2 pronged attack - patents deals from one end, and a direct legal attack on the validity of the GPL in the other. Of course, the 3rd pronged attack is the SLAF (SCO legal attack FUD), which doesn't look too healthy.

Talk about FUD...and innaccurate FUD at that.

Dave

Reply Parent Score: 3