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


(Mo)NoDevelop is Liked by Microsoft and Novell, Not by the GNU/Linux Crowd

Posted in GNU/Linux, Microsoft, Mono, Novell, Patents, TomTom at 1:58 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz


Summary: New Mono and MonoDevelop are advocated by Novell and the Microsoft press; many feel differently however

IT DOES NOT take much research to make a distinction and witness the apparent disparity between opinions in the Novell/Microsoft-dominated media and those of ‘mere mortals’. For instance, the latest comments about Novell/Mono in LinuxToday show that Novell’s products are not welcomed by the readers there at all, especially not after the FAT case has been almost concluded (it hasn’t yet, but more on that later). Maybe it’s the implicit assumption that when a product is released you must say something good, or simply say nothing at all. Comments tend to be more blunt.

“Maybe it’s the implicit assumption that when a product is released you must say something good, or simply say nothing at all.”Novell re-released MonoDevelop and Mono a couple of days ago (version bump) and based on the statements made by the company’s executives, this seems like the company’s emphasis at the moment. It’s its ‘added value’, for which it claims to be offering exclusive "peace of mind". Miguel de Icaza is actively supporting and advancing the company which is suing GNU/Linux-using companies.

How does it feel when Novell’s press releases that involve open source are always about Microsoft technologies that they publicly promote (see this latest press release)? There is also Mono in Fox (joining the likes of Rupert) and the Microsoft press too now endorses this infiltration of Microsoft technology into the company’s #1 threat. If Microsoft’s press is promoting Mono, then it must be bad for GNU/Linux. Is it not time to think of it as Ballmer-owned .NET (like FAT) and accordingly refer to it as “Ballmono” (along the lines of Ballnux)?

Look at OStatic today. Go-oo is being called “Novell- and Microsoft-backed fork.” It’s interesting because they acknowledge that it’s a fork [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7], and one that’s backed by Microsoft with Novell, which pays Microsoft for unknown software patents.

Speaking of which, Microsoft is promoting its patent propaganda book with a press release from New Jersey. Novell too is mentioned.

The internal debates among top executives over how to deal with the open source software movement — including the first-ever blow-by-blow account of the top-secret negotiations with Novell that led to the world’s first peace treaty and collaboration agreement between a proprietary and open source software company.

In case it’s not obvious, Microsoft is using Novell to impose a tax (software patents) upon GNU/Linux users. The nature of Mono and MonoDevelop (among other things) is that they significantly increase the trouble of willful infringement; the only one to benefit from this is Novell, which will offer and market SLE* as a ‘safe haven’. Bruce Perens too recognises this problem. Two days ago we wrote: [mind our emphasis]

And let’s not forget Microsoft. All of that talk about interoperability with Linux coming from them? It was just talk, because they’ve shown that anyone who tries to interoperate with Microsoft technology even as simple as the FAT filesystem will eventually be sued, or pushed into licensing, for their efforts. The way they act, the Microsoft-internal definition of “interoperability” must be “making the whole world owe us.”

And so, you should be wary of FAT, Office Open XML, .NET (including Mono), Silverlight, and of Microsoft’s participation in standards committees that don’t have a clear royalty-free committment, or, as is the case for Office Open XML, when the royalty-free committment is less than complete. These technologies leave the door open for submarine patents to sink your business.

Do you like Mono? Have you purchased/upgraded your licensed copy to Peace of Mind 11 yet?

Peace of mind

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


  1. JohnD said,

    April 1, 2009 at 6:59 pm


    Actually I do have a copy of SLES 11 running on a new server for a client. I’m using it as a host for Netware via VMWare Server 2.0.
    One thing I noticed is that it now recognizes the Dell RD1000 drive in Nautilus – way cool. I’ll probably upgrade another client to it later this summer when we upgrade them to Notes 8.5.

  2. JohnD said,

    April 1, 2009 at 7:35 pm


    For anyone:
    This comment on internet news:
    “Reply by Jason Biggs April 1 2009 10:22 AMPDT

    Guy: that’s the biggest collection of FUD I’ve ever seen posted in a single comment, you should be proud.

    Mono is an implementation of ECMA 334 and 335, ALL patents that IBM, Microsoft, Novell, and Intel have pertaining to those specifications are available royalty-free. Thus, none of those companies can sue Mono over patents they may have in those areas.”
    I found the article by following the Linux Today link above.
    Roy how would you respond to Jason’s post?

    Roy Schestowitz Reply:

    This is not correct. Moreover, being an ECMA standard (ECMA is corrupt by the way) means nothing for patents.

    saulgoode Reply:

    The question for Mr Biggs can one view a copy of this royalty-free patent license? What are its terms? Is it a perpetual license (extending until the patent expires)? Is it world-wide? Is it non-exclusive? Is it limited at all in field-of-endeavor? Is sub-licensing permitted?

    JohnD Reply:

    Here’s the link to the article – why not ask him?

    Roy Schestowitz Reply:

    Why was the context withheld until now?

    JohnD Reply:

    What context do you think was with held?
    I stated in one of the above posts that I followed a link in your post to the story and I read the comments attached to that story. Jason’s statement was one of those comments.
    It’s all there in black and white. I asked for opinions and I got some. Saulgoode posed a question that I can’t answer, but maybe Jason can.
    This is the first time I’ve heard that that there are parts of Mono that aren’t encumbered by patents (according to wikidpedia and Mr Biggs) If this is true, I think it should be reflected in discussions.

    Roy Schestowitz Reply:

    I was not complaining, just a little curious.

    Shane Coyle Reply:

    I, personally, have contacted HP and Microsoft each requesting information on the licensing around ECMA 334 & 335, and have yet to ever receive a response.

    I am in the process of planning a software project, and am requesting assistance with any potential licensing issues prior to commencement.

    Pursuant to the “Patents Statement” letter available on the ECMA web site (http://www.ecma-international.org/publications/files/ECMA-ST/Ecma PATENT/ECMA-334 & 335/2001ga-123 & 2002ga-003.pdf), I would like to request information regarding the process for obtaining any and all required licenses for creating an implementation of ECMA 334 (C# Language Specification) and ECMA 335 (Common Language Infrastructure) for the GNU/Linux Operating System, to be distributed under the GNU General Public License v2 or v3.

    If someone can figure out a physical address to send a mailed letter to, I’d love to try that approach since all I’ve ever received is a few autoreply acknowledgement from HP and no response at all from MS.

    saulgoode Reply:

    Shane, thanks for the update on your pursuit. I have been curious as to how it was progressing but realize that such things take time. This is one of the reasons why if it is indeed true that a grant is given to anyone who want to implement those components for free and for any purpose (as the Mono Project assures us) then it would be incumbent upon such a grant being made public.

    The necessity of every potential user of Mono having to contact Microsoft or HP to request a license for the ECMA 334/5 patents is quite simply not an acceptable condition for Free Software developers, distributors, or users.

    Shane Coyle Reply:

    The only concrete thing I’ve seen public is the pdf file on the ECMA site that indicates that MS and HP

    “…will grant, on a non-discriminatory basis, to any party requesting it, licenses on reasonable terms and conditions, for its patent(s) deemed necessary for the implementation of the ECMA standard…”

    But no word on exactly what those reasonable and non discriminatory terms are, that I am aware of.

    JohnD Reply:

    Perhaps you too should contact Mr Biggs and see what he has to say and if he could follow up the big boys. Maybe if there’s enough press – someone will actually answer.

    Roy Schestowitz Reply:

    What is H-P’s role?

    Shane Coyle Reply:

    I honestly don’t know what their contribution to C#/CLI is, they must feel they have some patents on aspects of 334 and 335 if they took the time to write a letter stating they’d grant rights under RAND terms for as long as the standard remains valid.

    Roy Schestowitz Reply:

    H-P signed a Silverlight deal with Microsoft less than a year ago. It’s unlikely to be related, though.

  3. JohnD said,

    April 1, 2009 at 8:00 pm


    Wikipedia seems to support his stance:

What Else is New

  1. The Latest EPO Spin: Staff Protesters Compared to 'Anti-Patent Campaigners' or 'Against UPC'

    Attempts to characterise legitimate complaints about the EPO's management as just an effort to derail the patent office itself, or even the patent system (spin courtesy of EPO and its media friends at IAM)

  2. The Serious Implication of Controversial FTI Consulting Contract: Every Press Article About EPO Could Have Been Paid for by EPO

    With nearly one million dollars dedicated in just one single year to reputation laundering, one can imagine that a lot of media coverage won't be objective, or just be synthetic EPO promotion, seeded by the EPO or its peripheral PR agents

  3. EPO: We Have Always Been at War With Europe (or Europeans)

    The European Patent Office (EPO) with its dubious attacks on free speech inside Europe further unveiled for the European public to see (as well as the international community, which oughtn't show any respect to the EPO, a de facto tyranny at the heart of Europe)

  4. What Everyone Needs to Know About the EPO's New War on Journalism

    A detailed list of facts or observations regarding the EPO's newfound love for censorship, even imposed on outside entities, including bloggers (part one of several to come)

  5. EPO Did Not Want to Take Down One Techrights Article, It Wanted to Take Down Many Articles Using Intimidation, SLAPPing, and Psychological Manipulation Late on a Friday Night

    Recalling the dirty tactics by which the European Patent Office sought to remove criticism of its dirty secret deals with large corporations, for whom it made available and was increasingly offering preferential treatment

  6. The European Private Office: What Was Once a Public Service is Now Crony Capitalism With Private Contractors

    The increasing privatisation of the European Patent Office (EPO), resembling what happens in the UK to the NHS, shows that the real goal is to crush the quality of the service and instead serve a bunch of rich and powerful interests, in defiance of the original goals of this well-funded (by taxpayers) organisation

  7. Microsoft Once Again Disregards People's Settings and Abuses Them, Again Pretends It's Just an Accident

    A conceited corporation, Microsoft, shows not only that it exploits its botnet to forcibly download massive binaries without consent but also that it vainly overrides people's privacy settings to spy on these people, sometimes with help from malicious hardware vendors such as Dell or Lenovo

  8. When the EPO Liaised With Capone (Literally) to Silence Bloggers, Delete Articles

    A dissection of the EPO's current media strategy, which involves not only funneling money into the media but also actively silencing opposing views

  9. Blogger Who Wrote About the EPO's Abuses Retires

    Bloggers' independent rebuttal capability against a media apparatus that is deep in the EPO's pocket is greatly diminished as Jeremy Phillips suddenly retires

  10. Leaked: EPO Award of €880,000 “in Order to Address the Media Presence of the EPO” (Reputation Laundering)

    The European Patent Office, a public body, wastes extravagant amounts of money on public relations (for 'damage control', like FIFA's) in an effort to undermine critics, not only among staff (internally) but also among the media (externally)

  11. Links 27/11/2015: KDE Plasma 5.5 Plans, Oracle Linux 7.2

    Links for the day

  12. Documents Needed: Contract or Information About EPO PR/Media Campaign to Mislead the World

    Rumour that the EPO spends almost as much as a million US dollars “with some selected press agencies to refurbish the image of the EPO”

  13. Guest Post: The EPO, EPC, Unitary Patent and the Money Issue

    Remarks on the Unitary Patent (UP) and the lesser-known aspects of the EPO and EPC, where the “real issue is money, about which very little is discussed in public...”

  14. Saving the Integrity of the European Patent Office (EPO)

    Some timely perspective on what's needed at the European Patent Office, which was detabilised by 'virtue' of making tyrants its official figureheads

  15. A Call for Bloggers and Journalists: Did EPO Intimidate and Threaten You Too? Please Speak Out.

    An effort to discover just how many people out there have been subjected to censorship and/or self-censorship by EPO aggression against the media

  16. European Patent Office (EPO) a “Kingdom Above the EU Countries, a Tyranny With ZERO Accountability”

    Criticism of the EPO's thuggish behaviour and endless efforts to crush dissenting voices by all means available, even when these means are in clear violation of international or European laws

  17. Links 26/11/2015: The $5 Raspberry Pi Zero, Running Sans Systemd Gets Hard

    Links for the day

  18. EPO Management Needs to Finally Recognise That It Itself is the Issue, Not the Staff or the Unions

    A showing of dissent even from the representatives whom the EPO tightly controls and why the latest union-busting goes a lot further than most people realise

  19. Even the EPO Central Staff Committee is Unhappy With EPO Management

    The questions asked by the Central Staff Committee shared for the public to see that not only a single union is concerned about the management's behaviour

  20. The Broken Window Economics of Patent Trolls Are Already Coming to Europe

    The plague which is widely known as patent trolls (non-practicing entities that prey on practicing companies) is being spread to Europe, owing in part to misguided policies and patent maximalists

  21. Debunking the EPO's Latest Marketing Nonsense From Les Échos and More on Benoît Battistelli's Nastygram to French Politician

    Our detailed remarks about French brainwash from the EPO's media partner (with Benoît Battistelli extensively quoted) and the concerns increasingly raised by French politicians, who urge for national or even continental intervention

  22. The Sun King Delusion: The Views of Techrights Are Just a Mirror of EPO Staff Unions

    Tackling some emerging spin we have seen coming from Battistelli's private letters -- spin which strives to project the views of Techrights onto staff unions and why it's very hypocritical a form of spin

  23. Links 25/11/2015: Webconverger 33.1, Netrunner 17 Released

    Links for the day

  24. United They Stand: FFPE-EPO Supports Suspended Staff Representatives From SUEPO

    An obscure union from the Dutch side of things at the EPO is expressing support for the suspended colleagues from SUEPO (more German than Dutch)

  25. Censoring WIPR Article About Censorship by EPO

    A testament to how terrified journalists have become when it comes to EPO coverage, to the point of deleting entire paragraphs

  26. Censorship at the EPO Escalates: Now We Have Threats to Sue Publishers

    Having already blocked Techrights, the EPO's management proceeds to further suppressions of speech, impeding its staff's access to independently-distributed information (neither ordinary staff nor management)

  27. Response to Bogus Accusations That EPO Staff Protests Are Really an Attempt to Derail UPC

    Common myths about staff protests in the European Patent Office (EPO) debunked, with some additional background and general perspective on recent events, the unitary patent (UPC) and so on

  28. New Heise Article Makes It Clear That 'Nazi'-Themed Accusations Against the Suspended Board Judge Were Insufficiently Substantiated

    The personal attacks on a judge who was illegally suspended (a so-called 'house ban') increasingly look like the management's own campaign of defamation, mostly intended to marginalise and punish a judge who spoke about serious charges against VP4 (Željko Topić)

  29. Links 24/11/2015: Asus Chromebit CS10, Second Linux 4.4 RC

    Links for the day

  30. European Central Bank Staff Committee Adds to Growing Pressure on Abusive EPO Management

    The staff representatives of the European Central Bank E-mail their colleagues -- with European Central Bank managers' approval -- regarding the European Patent Office and its attacks on staff unions


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


Recent Posts