Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 13th Dec 2010 19:27 UTC, submitted by lemur2
Mono Project For the most time, I've been firmly in the largest camp when it comes to the Mono debate - the 'I don't care'-camp. With patent lawsuits being hotter than Lady Gaga right now, that changed. For good reason, so it seems; while firmly in the 'ZOMG-MICROSOFT-IS-T3H-EVILL!1!!ONE!'-camp, The-Source.com investigated the five most popular Mono applications, and the conclusion is clear: all of them implement a lot of namespaces which are not covered by Microsoft's community promise thing.
Thread beginning with comment 453479
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: Mono is safe to use.
by michi on Tue 14th Dec 2010 14:02 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Mono is safe to use."
michi
Member since:
2006-02-04

That promise is worthless. It protects nobody but the implementors of a fully correct implementation. The ordinary developer cannot use that promise to anything. Besides that the promise is a swizz cheese - just look at Google and tell me: What worth does that promise have? Nada, I tell you. Nada.


I totally disagree with you. The Java patent grant protects the OpenJDK which is under GPL + classpath exception. That means that there is an open-source implementation of Java that cannot be sued by Oracle because of patent infringement.

The same is not true for Mono: there is nothing stopping Microsoft or Oracle from suing Mono because of patent infringements. Microsoft could even sue them for implementing core .Net classes because the community promise is not legally binding.

The only reason Oracle sues Google for Android and not Novell for Mono is that Android is successful and there is some chance to get a lot of money and Mono is not successful, so it is not worth suing them.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[4]: Mono is safe to use.
by the_trapper on Tue 14th Dec 2010 15:28 in reply to "RE[3]: Mono is safe to use."
the_trapper Member since:
2005-07-07

Microsoft could even sue them for implementing core .Net classes because the community promise is not legally binding.


The Community Promise IS legally binding. Irrevocably. Forever. Go read it.
http://www.microsoft.com/interop/cp/default.mspx

Q: Is this Community Promise legally binding on Microsoft and will it be available in the future to me and to others?

A: Yes, the CP is legally binding upon Microsoft. The CP is a unilateral promise from Microsoft and in these circumstances unilateral promises may be enforced against the party making such a promise. Because the CP states that the promise is irrevocable, it may not be withdrawn by Microsoft. The CP is, and will be, available to everyone now and in the future for the specifications to which it applies.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[4]: Mono is safe to use.
by dylansmrjones on Tue 14th Dec 2010 15:49 in reply to "RE[3]: Mono is safe to use."
dylansmrjones Member since:
2005-10-02

mono is safe.

At least according to Microsoft: “The type of action Oracle is taking against Google over Java is not going to happen,” said Tom Hanrahan of Microsoft’s Open Source Technology Centre. “If a .NET port to Android was through Mono it would fall under [the Microsoft Community Promise] Agreement”.

http://www.developerfusion.com/news/85355/microsoft-says-net-on-and...

http://www.techworld.com.au/article/358564/microsoft_won_t_stop_net...

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[4]: Mono is safe to use.
by Slambert666 on Wed 15th Dec 2010 11:32 in reply to "RE[3]: Mono is safe to use."
Slambert666 Member since:
2008-10-30

The only reason Oracle sues Google for Android and not Novell for Mono is that Android is successful and there is some chance to get a lot of money and Mono is not successful, so it is not worth suing them.


So, are you arguing that Java is better than C# because Java is owned by a patent troll that potentially sues everyone and that puts Mono at risk?

Reply Parent Score: 1