EditorsAbout the SiteComes vs. MicrosoftUsing This Web SiteSite ArchivesCredibility IndexOOXMLOpenDocumentPatentsNovellNews DigestSite NewsRSS

10.03.08

Here Come the Anti-GNU/Linux (Yet ‘Open’) Software Licences from Microsoft

Posted in Free/Libre Software, GNU/Linux, Microsoft, Mono, Novell, OSI, Windows at 8:25 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

“Open source is an intellectual-property destroyer [...] I can’t imagine something that could be worse than this for the software business and the intellectual-property business. I’m an American; I believe in the American way, I worry if the government encourages open source, and I don’t think we’ve done enough education of policymakers to understand the threat.”

Jim Allchin, Microsoft executive

LIKE SO MANY others, we were beyond "skeptical" when Microsoft tried to join OSI and hop on the “open source” bandwagon. Some external articles of interest include:

According to The Register, CodePlex’ morph into GNU/Linux-hostile territories is just routine. It comes ‘from above’ — from Microsoft’s own licences.

Microsoft is posting code to its much-trumpeted CodePlex open-source projects site using licenses and conditions that go against the principles of open source.

The company has been posting projects under Microsoft licenses that stop you from running CodePlex projects on non-Windows platforms or restrict access to code.

And this is the host SourceForge plays ball with?

Miguel de Icaza has complained about such things, but yesterday he ran back to Microsoft, giving them credit and thanking them. And in other related news, it turns out that even self-appointed experts fail to understand Moonlight. Here is a portion from a new article:

Microsoft announced Silverlight in May of 2007 at their MIX conference held in Las Vegas. The first Community Technology Preview (CTP) was released a few months after that. The design goal behind Silverlight was to make it possible to build applications for the Web that used essentially the same code as you would use for a desktop application. From an implementation perspective that translates to a version of Microsoft’s Common Language Runtime (CLR) running inside the browser.

Linux is obviously missing in the list of supported platforms–at least it was in the beginning. That’s where Moonlight comes in.

When asked why Siiverlight itself was not ported to GNU/Linux, Microsoft’s response was that Novell’s second-rare copycat [1, 2, 3] should do (or something along those lines). Since regulators would drag Microsoft’s feet until it supports GNU/Linux, Novell did a double favour here to Microsoft:

  1. It made it seem like Microsoft collaborates with GNU/Linux
  2. It ensured that all GNU/Linux ever gets is an inferior and incompatible thing called Moonlight, which is not SIlverlight

Worth adding are the legal barriers associated with Moonlight. It serves Novell, which spreads Mono like it’s mononucleosis. Novell has its reasons.

Bad Silverlight

Share this post: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Reddit
  • co.mments
  • DZone
  • email
  • Google Bookmarks
  • LinkedIn
  • NewsVine
  • Print
  • Technorati
  • TwitThis
  • Facebook

If you liked this post, consider subscribing to the RSS feed or join us now at the IRC channels.

Pages that cross-reference this one

29 Comments

  1. Joshua K said,

    October 3, 2008 at 11:57 pm

    Gravatar

    I wrote an small entry on my blog discussing two of Microsoft’s “Open Source” licenses. Give it a read.

    http://tinyurl.com/4x2m2r

  2. Bob said,

    October 4, 2008 at 12:02 am

    Gravatar

    > Novell did a double favour here to Microsoft:

    > 1. It made it seem like Microsoft collaborates with GNU/Linux
    > 2. It ensured that all GNU/Linux ever gets is an inferior and incompatible thing called Moonlight, which is not SIlverlight

    You make it sound like the GNU/Linux communities are a single entity that is of one mind. The GNU/Linux communities are communities of people that cooperate (with themselves and with other communities) in order to help each other to do their computing with GNU/Linux based systems.

    Microsoft may not be collaborating with the other communities but that doesn’t make the facts any less true: it accurate to say that Microsoft is collaborating with a community (maybe more?) that focuses on GNU/Linux. However, it is not accurate to say the “Microsoft is collaborating with GNU/Linux” as this implies that Microsoft is cooperating the whole collection of communites (they are not doing this).

    Secondly, the quality of the free Silverlight implementation depends upon the effort invested into it. If there was a great effort into implementing and developing Moonlight, I would have little doubt that Moonlight be inferior. Instead, people are relying on other people to do some work. People should invest their own resources and cooperate with like minded groups in order to make a good free software implementation a reality.

  3. David Masover said,

    October 4, 2008 at 1:28 am

    Gravatar

    It’s not clear Silverlight can do too much — it’s making progress, but it’s being seen as basically another Flash, and you can’t beat that market penetration.

    Speaking of which: Does anyone else find it disturbing that a proprietary browser plugin has more market share than any one browser? Or that there is a huge amount of content (videos, especially) which cannot be viewed any other way?

    I’m not saying Silverlight is good. I’m saying that it might be better to target the more immediate danger — the one that’s already here.

    I have selfish motivations, too — Moonlight seems a lot more likely to succeed, and a lot faster, than Gnash. Sure, I’d love to have everything be based on HTML5 Video, SVG, and Javascript, but if it’s got to be nonstandard, at least something nonstandard which has a reasonably open source, decent implementation on Linux.

    Similarly: It’d probably be better to have Ogg Theora or Dirac for video, and Vorbis or FLAC for audio, in an OGM or Matroska container. But I’ll take h.264/AAC in a MOV, or even Microsoft formats in WMV, over a proprietary player — especially a proprietary browser plugin that performs worse on my platform of choice than it did on other platforms three years ago.

  4. Roy Schestowitz said,

    October 4, 2008 at 2:49 am

    Gravatar

    @Joshua K: thanks, that’s excellent.

    @Bob: Silverlight serves Microsoft because it’s its attempt at media domination. Why would free labourers help that happen?

  5. Dan O'Brian said,

    October 4, 2008 at 8:46 am

    Gravatar

    Miguel de Icaza has complained about such things, but yesterday he ran back to Microsoft, giving them credit and thanking them.

    Had you read the blog post by Miguel, you would have seen that the reason he thanked them was because they fixed the license. Originally, MEF was under the MS-LPL which Miguel had pointed out was not Free Software friendly, and apparently after some talks, Miguel convinced them to reconsider their licensing choice and they relicensed under the MS-PL, which is Free Software friendly.

  6. Roy Schestowitz said,

    October 4, 2008 at 9:09 am

    Gravatar

    Yes, I know the story. I mentioned it before.

  7. AlexH said,

    October 4, 2008 at 12:09 pm

    Gravatar

    So when Miguel complained loudly and got them to fix their license, how is that him “running back to Microsoft”?

    At worst, it’s Microsoft running back to Miguel :D

    If he can convince them to re-license stuff as free software, that’s something that we should encourage.

  8. Roy Schestowitz said,

    October 4, 2008 at 2:36 pm

    Gravatar

    Over at Slashdot, Asay has just posted (or maybe it was the editors) a blast from 2007.

    Microsoft once again offering pseudo-open source on CodePlex

    Microsoft has been criticized in the past for how it manages CodePlex, Microsoft’s “open source project hosting site” (emphasis mine). This time, as The Register reports, Microsoft is hosting code that can only be run on the Windows platform.

    http://news.cnet.com/8301-13505_3-10058421-16.html

    Microsoft Treating “Windows-Only” As Open Source

    “The Register is reporting that Microsoft is hosting Windows-only projects on its ‘open source project hosting site,’ CodePlex. Miguel de Icaza caught and criticized Microsoft for doing this with its Microsoft Extensibility Framework (MEF), licensing it under the Microsoft Limited Permissive License (Ms-LPL), which restricts use of the code to Windows. Microsoft has changed the license for MEF to an OSI-approved license, the Microsoft Public License, but it continues to host a range of other projects under the Ms-LPL. If CodePlex wasn’t an ‘open source project hosting site,’ this wouldn’t be a problem. But when Microsoft invokes the ‘open source’ label, it has a duty to live up to associated expectations and ensure that the code it releases on CodePlex is actually open source. If it doesn’t want to do this — if it doesn’t want to abide by this most basic principle of open source — then call CodePlex something else and we’ll all move on.”

    http://developers.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/10/04/1515244&from=rss

  9. AlexH said,

    October 4, 2008 at 4:59 pm

    Gravatar

    That’s irrelevant in this case, as this is a recognised free software license.

    Whatever you think of Miguel, he wouldn’t be thanking Microsoft for Windows-only software.

  10. Roy Schestowitz said,

    October 4, 2008 at 5:23 pm

    Gravatar

    I know this. Miguel is not the bad guy. He just refuses to believe or understand how he’s being used for others to be used and sued.

  11. Dan O'Brian said,

    October 4, 2008 at 5:44 pm

    Gravatar

    Miguel has been in this industry for a long long time. He’s not new to the game. I don’t understand how you think you could possibly know better than Miguel when you’ve never even so much as left academia to experience the real world. And you’ve certainly never worked in the industry and so can’t even pretend to understand it.

    He’s not being used by Microsoft, he’s forcing their hand. He’s the one calling them out (re MS-LPL) and convincing them to play nice. He may not always be successful, but he’s accomplished a lot more than this site has toward reaching the goals of “Free Software Everywhere” than you could ever hope to accomplish.

  12. AlexH said,

    October 4, 2008 at 5:45 pm

    Gravatar

    Or, simply, he just has a different point of view.

    By saying he went “running back to Microsoft” makes it sounds like MS didn’t meet his demands, which they did. It’s a shame you didn’t point that out more clearly.

  13. Roy Schestowitz said,

    October 4, 2008 at 5:52 pm

    Gravatar

    I’ll write more about it shortly. .NET clones are off the FSF’s priority list this year.

  14. Dan O'Brian said,

    October 4, 2008 at 5:55 pm

    Gravatar

    Well, that’s nice for the FSF – but no one can argue that the FSF’s priority list is the be-all/end-all.

    There are clearly a lot of people interested in .NET on Linux.

  15. Roy Schestowitz said,

    October 4, 2008 at 6:15 pm

    Gravatar

    What matters is that dotgnu was there last year, but it’s no longer a priority.

  16. Dan O'Brian said,

    October 4, 2008 at 6:26 pm

    Gravatar

    Probably because they feel that Mono has filled that gap.

  17. Roy Schestowitz said,

    October 4, 2008 at 6:45 pm

    Gravatar

    That’s one possibility that I was going to mention. Boycott Novell is in Slashdot’s front page today, so it’ll wait until tomorrow. :-)

  18. Joshua K said,

    October 5, 2008 at 3:26 pm

    Gravatar

    The simple fact and truth is that those ‘revised’ licenses are not and will never be considered ‘free’ licenses. I am referring to the MS-PL and the MS-RL. Both are lies by specific clause:

    “””If you bring a patent claim against any contributor over patents that you claim are infringed by the software, your patent license from such contributor to the software ends automatically.”””

    I wrote about the implications, but apparently the link was mangled.

    http://stable-entropy.blogspot.com/2008/08/extents-of-open-source-microsoft.html

  19. Roy Schestowitz said,

    October 5, 2008 at 3:36 pm

    Gravatar

    Joshua K,

    I included your perspective in this followup post.

  20. AlexH said,

    October 5, 2008 at 3:56 pm

    Gravatar

    @Joshua_K: that’s completely untrue.

    Both GPL and Apache V2 have a similar clause, and the FSF consider the MS-PL to be a free license.

    There’s no reason to extend patent licenses to those who attack you first, that’s not a “freedom” that needs protecting.

  21. Joshua K said,

    October 5, 2008 at 8:07 pm

    Gravatar

    @AlexH
    Just because a large body declares the license to be “compatible” doesn’t actually make it so in the philosophical sense. Perhaps you missed my quotation of clauses 3B of the Microsoft Public License, and 3C of the Microsoft Reciprocal License. The difference between the General Public License Section 11 and Microsoft’s licenses is that the GPL does not self-destruct upon patent infringement claims, while the Microsoft licenses do. Although they look similar, the interpretation is vastly different.

  22. Dan O'Brian said,

    October 5, 2008 at 8:56 pm

    Gravatar

    The FSF has declared the MS-PL to be a Free Software license, therefor it is compatible in the philosophical sense.

  23. AlexH said,

    October 6, 2008 at 1:24 am

    Gravatar

    @Joshua_K:

    Except, the license doesn’t self-destruct automatically. That would be non-free.

    What happens is that you lose any patent license from that contributor. Which is the reasonably well-known “self defence” clause.

  24. Roy Schestowitz said,

    October 6, 2008 at 1:36 am

    Gravatar

    Do you have a link for that, Dan?

  25. AlexH said,

    October 6, 2008 at 1:52 am

    Gravatar

    @Roy: I gave the link several comments ago.

  26. Roy Schestowitz said,

    October 6, 2008 at 2:00 am

    Gravatar

    You posted no link/s here. I just want to see, explicitly, the FSF’s statement on this issue. Genuine curiously, not that I necessarily doubt it.

  27. AlexH said,

    October 6, 2008 at 2:45 am

    Gravatar

    @Roy: Er, I did!

    The FSF stance is no different to many other licenses: it’s a free license, but it does the same as Apache and therefore you shouldn’t use it for new software.

  28. Roy Schestowitz said,

    October 6, 2008 at 2:50 am

    Gravatar

    Oops. My bad, I missed it.

    Just spotted this post in Groklaw’s News Picks:

    Microsoft bad cop is up against the wall

    “This time they are offering Windows-only code on their “open source” CodePlex site. It’s not that this is technically impossible. It’s just prohibited by license.

    [...]

    “Last time they played this game they were pushing OOXML as an ISO standard. Before that they were promising to bury open source in patent suits.

    “Now they’re trying to sneak semi-proprietary code on their own site.

    “It’s like a crime boss getting arrested for pickpocketing. Lex Luthor gets a parking ticket, and pays it. Godzilla has become Reptar.

    “So instead of taking deep umbrage, I’m just sad. You want a super villain to be, well, super. Not silly.”

  29. AlexH said,

    October 6, 2008 at 2:54 am

    Gravatar

    I don’t think anyone is arguing that Microsoft have some particularly poor licenses in their “shared source” stink.

    However, I think Miguel did a very good thing convincing them to release something that was proprietary as free software. Microsoft are using free software themselves – witness the recent news about jQuery – and it’s good to see them give back, even if limited.

    Remember, you can take their stuff and turn it into Java or something even if you don’t like the original.

What Else is New


  1. Links 23/3/2017: Qt 5.9 Beta, Gluster Storage 3.2

    Links for the day



  2. The Administrative Council of the European Patent Organisation Has Just Buried an Innocent Judge That Battistelli Does Not Like

    An innocent judge (never proven guilty of anything, only publicly defamed with help from Team Battistelli and dubious 'intelligence' gathering) is one of the forgotten casualties of the latest meeting of the Administrative Council (AC), which has become growingly complicit rather than a mere bystander at a 'crime' scene



  3. Nepotism at the European Patent Office and Suspicious Absence of Tenders for Big Projects

    Carte blanche is a French term which now perfectly describes the symptoms encountered in the European Patent Office, more so once led by a lot of French people (Battistelli and his friends)



  4. “Terror” Patent Office Bemoans Terror, Spreads Lies

    Response to some of the latest utterances from the European Patent Office, where patently untruthful claims have rapidly become the norm



  5. China Seems to be Using Patents to Push Foreign Companies Out of China, in the Same Way It Infamously Uses Censorship

    Chinese patent policies are harming competition from abroad, e.g. Japan and the US, and US patent policy is being shaped by its higher courts, albeit not yet effectively combating the element that's destroying productive companies (besieged by patent trolls)



  6. 22,000 Blog Posts

    A special number is reached again, marking another milestone for the site



  7. The EPO is Lying to Its Own Staff About ILO and Endless (Over 2 Years) EPO Mistrials

    The creative writing skills of some spinners who work for Battistelli would have staff believe that all is fine and dandy at the EPO and ILO is dealing effectively with staff complaints about the EPO (even if several years too late)



  8. EPO’s Georg Weber Continues Horrifying Trend of EPO Promoting Software Patents in Defiance of Directive, EPC, and Common Sense

    The EPO's promotion of software patents, even out in the open, is an insult to the notion that the EPO is adhering to or is bound by the rules upon which it maintains its conditional monopoly



  9. Protectionism v Sharing: How the US Supreme Court Decides Patent Cases

    As the US Supreme Court (SCOTUS) starts delivering some decisions we take stock of what's to come regarding patents



  10. Links 22/3/2017: GNOME 3.24, Wine-Staging 2.4 Released

    Links for the day



  11. The Battistelli Regime, With Its Endless Scandals, Threatens to Crash the Unitary Patent (UPC), Stakeholders Concerned

    The disdain and the growing impatience have become a huge liability not just to Battistelli but to the European Patent Office (EPO) as a whole



  12. The Photos the EPO Absolutely Doesn't Want the Public to See: Battistelli is Building a Palace Using Stakeholders' Money

    The Office is scrambling to hide evidence of its out-of-control spendings, which will leave the EPO out of money when the backlog is eliminated by many erroneous grants (or rejections)



  13. In the US Patent System, Evolved Tricks for Bypassing Invalidations of Software Patents and Getting Them Granted by the USPTO

    A roundup of news about patents in the US and how the patent microcosm attempts to patent software in spite of Alice (high-impact SCOTUS decision from 2014)



  14. “Then They Came For Me—And There Was No One Left To Speak For Me.”

    The decreasing number of people who cover EPO scandals (partly due to fear, or Battistelli's notorious "reign of terror") and a cause for hope, as well as a call for help



  15. As Expected, the Patent Microcosm is Already Interfering, Lobbying and Influencing Supreme Court Justices

    The US Supreme Court (SCOTUS) is preparing to deliver some important decisions on cases with broad ramifications, e.g. for patent scope, and those who make money from patent feuds are attempting to alter the outcome (which would likely restrict patent scope even further, based on these Justices' track record)



  16. Intellectual Ventures -- Like Microsoft (Which It Came From) -- Spreads Patents to Manifest a Lot of Lawsuits

    That worrisome strategy which is passage of patents to active (legally-aggressive) trolls seems to be a commonality, seen across both Microsoft and its biggest ally among trolls, which Microsoft and Bill Gates helped create and still fund



  17. What the Patent Microcosm is Saying About the EPO and the UPC

    Response to 3 law firms and today's output from them, which serves to inform or misinform the European public at times of Big Lies and fog of (patent) war, revealing the true nature of 21st century asymmetric patent warfare and lobbying



  18. Tough Day for the EPO's Media/Press/PR Team, Trying 'Damage Control' After Important Techrights Publications

    In an effort to save face and regain a sense of legitimacy the EPO publishes various things belatedly, and only after Techrights made these things publicly known and widely discussed



  19. Links 21/3/2017: PyPy Releases, Radeon RX Vega, Eileen Evans at Linux Foundation

    Links for the day



  20. In IAM, Asian Courts That Deliver Justice Are “Unfriendly” and Asian Patent Trolls Are Desirable

    Rebuttal or response to the latest pieces from IAM, which keeps promoting a culture of litigation rather than sharing, collaboration, negotiation, and open innovation



  21. At EPO “I Have the Feeling That Lowering Quality is Part of a Concerted Plan.”

    Growing concern about patent quality at the EPO -- a subject which causes managers to get rather nervous -- is now an issue at the forefront



  22. EPO Reduces the World to Just Seven Nations to Bolster an Illusion of Growing 'Demand' for European Patents

    The unscientific -- if not antiscientific -- attitude of the European Patent Office (EPO) continues to show with the arrival of yet more misleading 'infographics' (disinfographics would be a more suitable term)



  23. Letter to Angela Merkel Expresses Concerns About Impact of EPO Scandals on Germany and Its Image

    Dr. Angela Merkel, arguably the most powerful woman in the world, is being warned about the consequences of Germany ignoring (and hence facilitating) the abuses of Benoît Battistelli



  24. EPO Caricature: Low Patent Quality Not an Achievement

    A new cartoon about the legacy of Battistelli, which ruins both inventors and staff (examination) while handing money to abusers



  25. Are Lithuania and Latvia the Latest Additions to the List of Benoît Battistelli's Vassal States?

    Benoît Battistelli's 'back room' deals came at an interesting, strategic time and the Office uncharacteristically kept quiet about these



  26. Links 20/3/2017: Linux 4.11 RC3, OpenSSH 7.5 Released

    Links for the day



  27. Supposedly 'Pampered' Prisoners Are Still Prisoners of the EPO

    Response to those gross and familiar attempts to portray patent examiners, not politicians who trample all over them, as the cause of all the problems at the EPO



  28. Insulting Reversal of Narratives at the EPO: Team Battistelli as the Victim

    At times of great oppression against staff, in clear defiance of the law in fact, journalists are being asked (or expected) to view the oppressor as the victim, even when this oppressor drives people to suicide



  29. Battistelli's EPO Copies China -- Not the US -- When it Comes to Patenting Software and Expanding Patent Scope

    A detailed explanation of some of the latest reports from China and the US, serving to show that one opens up to software patents whereas the other shuts the door on them (and guess whose lead the EPO is taking)



  30. What IAM Says About AST, RPX, Ericsson, and IBM

    IAM, the trolls' mouthpiece (also the EPO's mouthpiece, but that's another story), provides updates on trolls and troll-like entities, but further commentary is needed to clarify and counterbalance the promotional language


CoPilotCo

RSS 64x64RSS Feed: subscribe to the RSS feed for regular updates

Home iconSite Wiki: You can improve this site by helping the extension of the site's content

Home iconSite Home: Background about the site and some key features in the front page

Chat iconIRC Channel: Come and chat with us in real time

CoPilotCo

Recent Posts