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. Inverting Narratives: IAM 'Magazine' Paints Massive Patent Bully Microsoft (Preying on the Weak) as a Defender of the Powerless

    Selective coverage and deliberate misinterpretation of Microsoft's tactics (patent settlement under threat, disguised as "pre-installation of some of the US company’s software products") as seen in IAM almost every week these days



  2. The Sickness of the EPO – Part I: Motivation for New Series of Articles

    An introduction or prelude to a long series of upcoming posts, whose purpose is to show governance by coercion, pressure, retribution and tribalism rather than professional relationship between human beings at the European Patent Office (EPO)



  3. Insensitivity at the EPO’s Management – Part VII: EPO Hypocrisy on Cancer and Lack of Feedback to and From ECPC

    The European Cancer Patient Coalition (ECPC), which calls itself "the largest European cancer patients' umbrella organisation," fails to fulfill its duties, says a source of ours, and the EPO makes things even worse



  4. Links 21/2/2017: KDE Plasma 5.9.2 in Chakra GNU/Linux, pfSense 2.3.3

    Links for the day



  5. EPO Caricature: Battistelli's Wall

    Battistelli's solution to everything at the EPO is exclusion and barriers



  6. The 'New' Microsoft is Still Acting Like a Dangerous Cult in an Effort to Hijack and/or Undermine All Free/Open Source Software

    In an effort to combat any large deployment of non-Microsoft software, the company goes personal and attempts to overthrow even management that is not receptive to Microsoft's agenda



  7. PTAB Petitioned to Help Against Patent Troll InfoGation Corp., Which Goes After Linux/Android OEMs in China

    A new example of software patents against Free software, or trolls against companies that are distributing freedom-respecting software from a country where these patents are not even potent (they don't exist there)



  8. Links 20/2/2017: Linux 4.10, LineageOS Milestone

    Links for the day



  9. No, Doing Mathematical Operations on a Processor Does Not Make Algorithms Patent-Eligible

    Old and familiar tricks -- a method for tricking examiners into the idea that algorithms are actual machines -- are being peddled by Watchtroll again



  10. Paid-for UPC Proponent, IAM 'Magazine', Debunked on UPC Again

    The impact of the corrupted (by EPO money) media goes further than one might expect and even 'borrows' out-of-date news in order to promote the UPC



  11. Lack of Justice in and Around the EPO Drawing Scrutiny

    The status of the EPO as an entity above the law (in Germany, the Netherlands, Switzerland and so on) is becoming the subject of press reports and staff is leaving in large numbers



  12. Links 19/2/2017: GParted 0.28.1, LibreOffice Donations Record

    Links for the day



  13. The EPO is Becoming an Embarrassment to Europe and a Growing Threat to the European Union

    The increasingly pathetic moves by Battistelli and the ever-declining image/status of the EPO (only 0% of polled stakeholders approve Battistelli's management) is causing damage to the reputation of the European Union, even if the EPO is not a European Union organ but an international one



  14. Patent Misconceptions Promoted by the Patent Meta-Industry

    Cherry-picking one's way into the perception of patent eligibility for software and the misguided belief that without patents there will be no innovation



  15. As the United States Shuts Its Door on Low-Quality Patents the Patent Trolls Move to Asia

    Disintegration of Intellectual Ventures (further shrinkage after losing software patents at CAFC), China's massive patent bubble, and Singapore's implicit invitation/facilitation of patent trolls (bubble economy)



  16. Links 17/2/2017: Wine 2.2, New Ubuntu LTS

    Links for the day



  17. Bad Advice From Mintz Levin and Bejin Bieneman PLC Would Have People Believe That Software Patents Are Still Worth Pursuing

    The latest examples of misleading articles which, in spite of the avalanche of software patents in the United States, continue to promote these



  18. Patents Are Not Property, They Are a Monopoly, and They Are Not Owned But Temporarily Granted

    Patent maximalism and distortion of concepts associated with patents tackled again, for terminology is being hijacked by those who turned patents into their "milking cows"



  19. SoftBank Group, New Owner of ARM, Could Potentially Become (in Part) a Patent Troll or an Aggressor Like Qualcomm

    SoftBank grabbed headlines (in the West at least) when it bought ARM, but will it soon grab headlines for going after practicing companies using a bunch of patents that it got from Inventergy, ARM, and beyond?



  20. Technicolor, Having Turned Into a Patent Troll, Attacks Android/Tizen/Linux With Patents in Europe

    Technicolor, which a lot of the media portrayed as a patent troll in previous years (especially after it had sued Apple, HTC and Samsung), is now taking action against Samsung in Europe (Paris, Dusseldorf and Mannheim)



  21. Michelle Lee is Still “in Charge” of the US Patent System

    Contrary to a malicious whispering campaign against Lee (a coup attempt, courtesy of patent maximalists who make a living from mass litigation), she is still in charge of the USPTO



  22. Our Assessment: EPO Wants a Lot of Low-Quality Patents and Low-Paid Staff With UPC (Prosecution Galore)

    The European Patent Office seems to be less interested in examination and more interested in facilitating overzealous prosecution all across Europe and beyond; The Administrative Council has shown no signs that it is interested in profound changes, except those proposed by Battistelli in the face of growing resistance from staff and from ordinary stakeholders



  23. Links 16/2/2017: HITMAN for GNU/Linux, Go 1.8

    Links for the day



  24. Yet More Complaints About the European Patent Office in the Bavarian Regional Government

    Some German politicians do care about the welfare of EPO staff, a lot more so than the EPO's management that is actively crushing this staff



  25. EPO Staff Representatives to Escalate Complaint About Severe Injustices to the EPO's Secretive Board 28

    In a new letter to President Benoît Battistelli it is made abundantly apparent -- however politely -- that Battistelli's gross abuses could further complicate things for Battistelli, who is already embroiled in a fight with his predecessor, Roland Grossenbacher



  26. New Survey Reveals That High Patent Quality, or Elimination of Bad Patents, is Desirable to Patent Holders

    A new survey from Bloomberg BNA and AIPLA reveals that the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), which still grows in prominence, is supported by people who have themselves gotten patents (not those who are in the bureaucracy of patents and self-serving politics)



  27. Open Patent Office is Not the Solution; Ending Software Patents is the Solution

    Our remarks about the goals and methods of the newly-established Open Patent Office and what is instead needed in order to combat the menace that threatens software development



  28. New Scholarly Paper Says “UK’s Withdrawal From the EU Could Mean That the Entire (Unitary Patent) System Will Not Go Into Effect”

    A paper from academics -- not from the patent microcosm (for a change) -- provides a more sobering interpretation, suggesting quite rightly that the UPC can't happen in the UK (or in Europe), or simply not endure if some front groups such as CIPA somehow managed to bamboozle politicians into it (ratification in haste, before the facts are known)



  29. Patent Trolls Update: Rodney Gilstrap Maintains His Support for Trolls, MPEG-LA Goes Hunting in China, and Blackberry Hits Nokia

    A roundup of the latest news about patent trolls and what they are up to in the United States, Europe, and Asia



  30. Guest Post: EPO, an Idyllic Place to Work

    The true face of the EPO as explained by an insider, recalling the history that led to the negative image and toxic work atmosphere


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