Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 9th Nov 2010 22:28 UTC, submitted by fran
Java "Charging that Oracle has willfully disregarded the licensing terms for its own Java technology, the Apache Software Foundation has called upon other members of the Java Community Process (JCP) to vote against the next proposed version of the language, should Oracle continue to impose restrictions on open-source Java use. The nonprofit organization has also indicated that it could end its involvement in the JCP if the licensing restrictions stay in place."
Thread beginning with comment 449542
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
gnufreex
Member since:
2010-05-06

True, It is quite obvious that with the patent promise for dotNET Microsoft cannot possibly sue Mono.

Microsoft patent promise is worth nothing, and it only includes subsets of .NET. Mono have gone far beyond promised part. De Icaza promised last year to make mono distribution with only those parts that are under Microsoft's false promise, but he realized that such piece of software would be unusable and it would show how dangerous Mono is. So he gave up, because he can't continue lying that Mono is safe if he actually shows that only small subset is under Microsoft's fake promise.

Also, even if such subset of Mono is used, that doesn't protect you from Microsoft's trolls like Paul Allen. Microsoft could just give a patent to Traul Allen and let him go wild against GNU/Linux distributors that ship Mono. Fake promise only implies that Microsoft won't sue, doesn't say anything about Traul Allen or Nathan Myhrvold, or Accacia(accacia already sued Red Hat for bogus patents).

Reply Parent Score: 3

Slambert666 Member since:
2008-10-30

Microsoft patent promise is worth nothing, and it only includes subsets of .NET. Mono have gone far beyond promised part. De Icaza promised last year to make mono distribution with only those parts that are under Microsoft's false promise, but he realized that such piece of software would be unusable and it would show how dangerous Mono is. So he gave up, because he can't continue lying that Mono is safe if he actually shows that only small subset is under Microsoft's fake promise.

Also, even if such subset of Mono is used, that doesn't protect you from Microsoft's trolls like Paul Allen. Microsoft could just give a patent to Traul Allen and let him go wild against GNU/Linux distributors that ship Mono. Fake promise only implies that Microsoft won't sue, doesn't say anything about Traul Allen or Nathan Myhrvold, or Accacia(accacia already sued Red Hat for bogus patents).


Dude, pretty much everything you say here is not just wrong, but factually wrong, and a quick Google would have told you so.

You must remember the key to good propaganda, FUD and other misrepresentations is to at least get some of the facts right before you switch.

Reply Parent Score: 1

gnufreex Member since:
2010-05-06

Maybe you should have used google instead of ad hominem.

For example, here is one article about De Icaza's avoidance to make ECMA/cp covered Mono distribution:
http://www.itwire.com/opinion-and-analysis/open-sauce/42394-where-o...

He promised that, now he avoids it.

And here is world's biggest patent troll, Nathan Myrhwold http://www.intellectualventures.com/Home.aspx

He is ex-Microsoftie like Traul Allen, and he too attacks Microsoft's competitors, except he often gives patents to "partners" (read: other trolls) to do dirty work.

Oh, and here are Microsoft statements wrt patents and openness of .NET: http://www.the-source.com/open-source-at-microsoft/open-source-at-m...

This statement is very interesting:

“If someone implemented a product that conforms to the specification, we believe we have a patent or one pending that’s essential to implementing the specification.”

Any defence of Mono is frivolous. It is in worse position than Dalvik, and it is put there on purpose by De Icaza, to advance Microsoft agenda. Only reason why Mono is not under legal pressure right now is fact that nobody important use it. Value of Microsoft Mono patents increase as importance and number open source Mono applications increase. When they decide it is hight enough, they will sue.

Reply Parent Score: 2