Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 7th Jul 2009 08:51 UTC, submitted by PLan
Mono Project We've already seen some heavy discussion on Mono and C# here on OSNews the past few weeks, as it became clear the patent situation regarding the ECMA parts of Mono was anything but faith inspiring. This issue seems to be resolved now: Microsoft has made a legally binding promise not to sue anyone who uses or distributes implementations of said ECMA standards. Following this news, Mono will be split in two; the ECMA standard parts, and the rest.
Thread beginning with comment 372034
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: So the whining was worth it ..
by Jokel on Tue 7th Jul 2009 09:34 UTC in reply to "So the whining was worth it .."
Jokel
Member since:
2006-06-01

I think you are right, but before we happily jump around I still have some toughts (I have written it on that page also). Here it goes:


And Microsoft never ever broke a promise in it's entire existence... right?


You know. A promise is something different than a contract or official written unbreakable declaration. You can promise anything, but as long as it is no official statement you can always declare someone is acting not right on some vague grounds, and declare the promise not longer binding. As long as there is no written contract a promise means nothing...


And it's only a part of the story. Mono is partly tied to closed API's from Microsoft. Microsoft can easily "upgrade" those API's to make them incompatible with a part of Mono. They also can continuously "extend" those code to make mono always lag behind, making mono the second citizen ands less desirable than the "original". That last thing can then be used in the marketing FUD as a example how Linux is "not capable"...


I still am not convinced - sorry...


Just my 2 cents.

Reply Parent Score: 1

Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

It might be called a promise, but it's legally binding. Do you understand legally binding? It's a perpetual, legally binding one-way patent license that does not require signing or royalties.

Reply Parent Score: 5

edogawaconan Member since:
2006-10-10

as you said, we need to call lawyer to clarify this... before some people start pretending as lawyer ;)

Edited 2009-07-07 09:51 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 1

TemporalBeing Member since:
2007-08-22

It might be called a promise, but it's legally binding. Do you understand legally binding? It's a perpetual, legally binding one-way patent license that does not require signing or royalties.


You do realize that Microsoft is famous for breaking even legally binding contracts, don't you?

There is, after all, a good history of that going all the way back to its founding. Of exceptional fame is Microsoft's move to break its PC-DOS/MS-DOS contract with IBM when sales were greater than expected so that it could continue to extract royalties beyond the contract's provisional period.

Yeah - never trust Microsoft to keep its word - even if legally binding. It's a reputation they earned.

Reply Parent Score: 3