Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 28th Jul 2009 21:33 UTC
"Microsoft violated the GPLv2 when it distributed its Hyper-V Linux Integration Components without providing source code, says the Software Freedom Law Center. The violation was rectified when Microsoft contributed more than 20,000 lines of source code to the Linux community last week. The drivers are designed to improve the performance of the Linux operating system when it is virtualized on the Windows Server 2008 Hyper-V hypervisor-based virtualization system."
Thread beginning with comment 375790
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2005-07-24
Man, I'm drooling to see what steveb will have to say about this when someone asks him about MS violating the GPL.
Well, he *could* say that the GPL code floating around is a trap just waiting to close upon any company which distributes software. This is not a coup for GPL. This is a demonstration of the very thing that MS has FUD'd about in the past. This is their concrete example of "GPL is cancer". Careful. Don't choke on your popcorn.
Somehow, though, I suspect that today, in 2009, he will not say those things.
Edited 2009-07-28 22:52 UTC
Member since:2006-01-11
On the contrary, any open source license can be violated. If you want to use someone else's code, whether that code is open source, GPL, BSD, Apache, or proprietary, you need to follow the rules for doing so. If you break the rules, you are infringing copyright. Large companies have legal staffs to deal with these matters.
GPLv2 is a shorter, simpler license than many of the others (e.g. Mozilla's license, or Apache's). It's not that hard.
Member since:2007-02-17
"Man, I'm drooling to see what steveb will have to say about this when someone asks him about MS violating the GPL.
Well, he *could* say that the GPL code floating around is a trap just waiting to close upon any company which distributes software. This is not a coup for GPL. This is a demonstration of the very thing that MS has FUD'd about in the past. This is their concrete example of "GPL is cancer". Careful. Don't choke on your popcorn. Somehow, though, I suspect that today, in 2009, he will not say those things. " Well, he could *try* to claim that the GPL is cancer ... but anyone with the tiniest ounce of sense could see right through him. The GPL didn't "infect" Microsoft's code, but rather Microsoft themselves took already-GPL'ed code and tried to re-distribute it within their own closed-source HyperV product.
Naugthy naughty, Steve B.
If it had been the reverse, and some Linux distribution had tried to ship some Microsoft-written code within it, Steve B and lawyers would have been all over them like a nasty rash.
Interestingly, what Microsoft actually did was try to claim that they had always intended to release this code under the GPL v2.
Edited 2009-07-29 03:38 UTC
Recent Original Stories
Recent Comments
Headlines
Random Comments
Random Stories
Random OS Link
Member since:
2005-12-18
Man, I'm drooling to see what steveb will have to say about this when someone asks him about MS violating the GPL.
And will he ever claim about us GNU/Linux users stealing their IP with a straight face?