Linked by Kroc Camen on Tue 17th May 2011 12:05 UTC
Mono Project Two weeks ago we covered the news that the Mono development team were let go kicked out by the new owners of Novel, Attachmate, apparently to move operations to Germany. Miguel de Icazza, founder of Mono, has taken this opportunity to break off on his own and has started a new company, Xamarin, to bring commercial .NET development products to iOS and Android.
Thread beginning with comment 473499
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: legal Problems are deep
by Slambert666 on Wed 18th May 2011 03:50 UTC in reply to "RE: legal Problems are deep"
Member since:

You know that your linked article is just counting namespaces and not classes or use of patents.

For example a point struct is best kept in System.Drawing and therefore System.Drawing is included even if no "Patent Promise" exists for this namespace.

So how is it so "Dangerous" to use a point struct?

Doesn't Java have a Point class? Is that "Dangerous" to use as well? Or is it only "Dangerous" if used from C#?

Is short, your spin is disingenuous at best.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[3]: legal Problems are deep
by oiaohm on Wed 18th May 2011 04:43 in reply to "RE[2]: legal Problems are deep"
oiaohm Member since:

Doesn't Java have a Point class? Is that "Dangerous" to use as well? Or is it only "Dangerous" if used from C#?

The issue here is method used in the C# point class might be MS unique and patented. Same with every other class that is not contained in the ECMA. There maybe landmines. Safe bet is to be able to build on a landmine free field. What mono does not provide developers with.

Java if your Java is from Redhat, IBM or Oracle. It has a full patent coverage. All open source java engines form them are under GPL or LGPL.

Java has 3 approved suppliers that can make their own forms. Oracle cannot attack Redhat or IBM or product produced using Java patents. Same with reverse. IBM cannot use it patents that cover java against Redhat or Orcale building a JVM. And so on. Also this patent allowance does not have a timeframe. New patents taken out by IBM Orcale or Redhat cannot be applied against each other or their users over java.

Multi patent safe supply lines. Its also possible to build with a non extended Java. Redhat or Orcales base Java's provide. So you know you are inside the patent protected zone.

.Net. MS the only supplier with full unlimited supply protection. Novell had until the end of this year. If you were building with ECMA spec .net you would also have unlimited timeframe but there are basically no one is providing that.

Issue with mono is that there are many namespaces that cannot be disabled that are outside the patent shield of the community promise. So developers cannot simply check if they are inside or outside the protection.

Java is simple install the Orcale JVM or the Redhat JVM if you application works it using nothing from the JVM that does not have patent protection.

Now lets do .net. Application works fine on MS .net nop that is extended. It works fine on mono nop that is extended. This is not a suitable outcome.

Even with C and C++ I can restrict my build and runtime environments so only patent protection covered parts or too old to be patent protected out there. .Net currently too hard to be sure you are legally free and clear unless you restrict yourself to Microsoft products only.

Basically if you can present me with a method that I can be 100 percent sure I am running legally free and clear with .net on Linux OS X and so on. I maybe interested in the language.

Legal side must be answered. All the data of the legal issues of mono is out there. Been done many times over. Time to stop saying its not important.

GTK interfaces for mono most likely are not a legal issue since patent breach most likely would have to be in GTK so would have a heavy legal defense.

This is the critical thing. The most dangerous stuff is by MS and not covered by a patent grant.

Remember MS has been caught selling patents off to patent trolls to have those patents used against Linux. Yes so MS can patent attack Linux without their name on it. Nothing is stopping MS from selling patents off to trolls to attack mono users if mono ever becomes a threat to their market share.

MS is confirmed hostile to open source by their actions.

Reply Parent Score: 5

Slambert666 Member since:

This is the critical thing. The most dangerous stuff is by MS and not covered by a patent grant.

You are applying double standards here.

Microsoft has not issued a patent grant for the following technologies:
Python, PHP, Linux Kernel, (Free, Open, NET) BSD Kernel, ttf, rendering (numerous patents), application skinning (numerous patents), Ruby, LUA, IDE's, Libre Office etc. etc. etc. etc.

Obviously you must argue against their usage since there is no MS Patent Grant.

What on earth makes you think that Mono is somehow different?

Reply Parent Score: 1