Eric S. Raymond writes on his blog: "There's been a lot of debate in the community about how OSI should properly handle Microsoft's planned submission of some of its licenses for OSD certification. That debate has been been going on within OSI, too. OSI's official position, from the beginning, which I helped formulate and have expressed to any number of reporters and analysts, is that OSI will treat any licenses submitted to Microsoft strictly on their merits, without fear or favor. That remains OSI's position. But I find that my resolve is being sorely tested."
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2006-01-27
Member since:2005-07-02
Member since:2006-12-07
Well their licenses have some copyright and patent provisions, which is uncommon for other OS licenses. Those features might appeal to someone. Those licenses might invite developers from outside of FSF dominated and influenced circles, and those who generally distrust FSF, to share their code. I don't see anything wrong with that.
I think that motive is more commercial than political. MS server software (Sharepoint, Exchange) can be customized and scripted in a way that conforms to open standards, using SOAP and (Web)DAV. Having open source people developing useful additional features would increase value of their server software and their sales. Something similar to SugarCRM community.
Yes, I think that Microsoft is much less political then most of the people think. Steve Ballmer is a businessman in the first place. He has a simple goal: make more money.
Member since:2005-07-02
*All* FOSS licenses are based on copyright law. As far as patents go, I know the GPL is against it (as are others), but I don't know how the BSD license treats the issue.
You don't seem to realize that the OSI has *nothing* to do with the FSF. ESR and RMS apparently can't stand each other (well, that's what the story tells, anyway).
You also don't seem to understand how politics and money are deeply entertwined.
Politics pertains to power. One of the forms power takes is money. Therefore money and politics are deeply linked, and have been since the beginning of civilization.
MS trying to pervert the ISO certification process to fast-track OOXML is inherently political in nature, and they're using money to influence the outcome.
Member since:
2005-07-02
You seem to suggest that Microsoft isn't engagin in politics by introducing these new licenses (when there were perfectly good licences for them to choose from)?