Skip to content
Welcome guest. | Register | Login | Add
About | Wiki | Legacy

microsoft


Co-founder of the Open Source Initiative, Eric S. Raymond, writes:

"I find that my resolve is being sorely tested. Because Microsoft's behavior in the last few months with respect to OOXML has been egregious. They haven't stopped at pushing a "standard" that is divisive, technically bogus, and an obvious tool of monopoly lock-in; they have resorted to lying, ballot-stuffing, committee-packing, and outright bribery to ram it through the ISO standardization process in ways that violate ISO's own guidelines wholesale."

"This is not behavior that we, as a community, can live with. Despite my previous determination, I find I'm almost ready to recommend that OSI tell Microsoft to ram its licenses up one of its own orifices, even if they are technically OSD compliant. Because what good is it to conform to the letter of OSD if you're raping its spirit?"


The Free Software Foundation, although with a bit of a delay, responds to Microsoft's claims regarding the GPLv3 with a decisive tone:

"Microsoft has said that it expects respect for its so-called "intellectual property"--a propaganda term designed to confuse patent law with copyright and other unrelated laws, and to muddy the different issues they raise. We will ensure--and, to the extent of our resources, assist other GPLv3 licensors in ensuring--that Microsoft respects our copyrights and complies with our licenses." -- Read more


In an interesting take on recent announcement coming from the Linux Foundation, Sam Varghese writes:

"On April 1 this year, I wrote a spoof headlined "Ballmer joins Linux Foundation board." Considering the statements that were reported last week as emanating from the executive director of the same foundation, Jim Zemlin, I wonder if my tale will still be considered a spoof after a few years."

"Judging from the CV available on the Linux Foundation website, Zemlin, clearly, has had no touch with open source apart from various marketing roles. It is claimed that he is "widely quoted in the press on open source and commercial software trends..."" -- Read more


Is Microsoft joining "Open Source"? That still sounds alarmingly suspicious indeed, but.. let's see..

Tectonic writes: "Bill Hilf, general manager of platform strategy at Microsoft, announced last week at the O'Reilly Open Source Convention (OSCON), that the company was submitting its shared licences, which include the permissive license, community license and reference licence, to the Open Source Initiative (OSI) for certification as true open source licences."

So, "Shared Source" licenses, previously known as *not* adhering to the Open Source definition and for that matter the Free Software definition are submitted for approval as such. Weren't these a "see but don't touch" kind of licenses?


"The terms of Linux distributor Linspire's agreement with Microsoft betrays a deal "worse" than that between Microsoft and Novell, according to legal expert Pamela Jones.

Jones, author of the Groklaw blog, wrote on Sunday that the Linspire deal requires users to give up all the freedoms they would expect under the General Public License (GPL), the licence governing the use and distribution of much open-source software."

"Announced in June, Microsoft's deal with Linspire was the latest in a series of arrangements made between Redmond and Linux distributors such as Novell and Xandros. Other distributors such as Canonical, Mandriva and Red Hat have spurned Microsoft's advances.