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

04.01.09

(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

Monodevelop

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

16 Comments

  1. JohnD said,

    April 1, 2009 at 6:59 pm

    Gravatar

    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

    Gravatar

    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:

    http://www.internetnews.com/dev-news/article.php/3812851/Novells+Mono+Gets+Faster+and+More+Visual.htm
    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

    Gravatar

    Wikipedia seems to support his stance:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mono_(software)

What Else is New


  1. The Unitary Patent and the Unified Patent Court (UPC): This Week's Latest Spin and Lies

    The EPO has adopted a largely passive approach, choosing barely to comment at all on the UPC whereas Team UPC keeps repeating the same misleading if not patently untrue claims to perpetuate the notion that UPC is inevitable



  2. Links 25/5/2018: OpenSUSE 15 Leap Released, PostgreSQL 11 Beta

    Links for the day



  3. Privacy Statement

    Today, May 25th, the European General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) goes into full effect; we hereby make a statement on privacy



  4. Saint-Germain's Poisonous Legacy of "Toxic Loans": The SIDRU “Toxic Loan” Débâcle and Criticism of Lamy From Local Opposition Groups

    The EPO‘s entrance into the “toxic loans” trap as of a few months back (just like in Saint-Germain) is a sign of potential trouble ahead; The SIDRU “toxic loan” débâcle is highlighted as per criticism of mayor Lamy (St Germain-en-Laye, where Battistelli is deputy mayor) from local opposition groups



  5. New EPO Caricature: The Rubber Stamp

    Cartoon which circulates in EPO 'circles', encapsulating the concern many people have about the quality of granted patents and unrealistic expectations from the management



  6. Links 24/5/2018: RIP Robin “Roblimo” Miller, Qt 5.11 Released

    Links for the day



  7. Walmart, Bank of America, Allied Security Trust (AST) and the Rush for 'Blockchain' Patents

    The hoarding of patents on novel-sounding code has reached ridiculous levels; very large corporations and even patent trolls arm themselves with such patents, hoping to make returns by means of litigation or an 'arms trade'



  8. Stupid Blogs, Stupid Lawsuits, and Stupid Patents

    The stupidity of the patent microcosm, which would like to see everything in the world patented and which would gleefully smear or even sue its critics (the EFF was sued several times for libel over its "Stupid Patent of the Month" series)



  9. Perpetuating the Big Lie That Unitary Patent (UPC) is About to Kick Off

    The (in)famous old lie about UPC being "just around the corner" is still being circulated, mainly if not only by patent law firms which stand to benefit from a litigation Armageddon in Europe



  10. EPO Validation in Former French Colonies That Have Zero European Patents

    The strategy of the EPO seems to be centered around the interests of Benoît Battistelli and his political career rather than that of the EPO; validation deals and dubious 'Inventor Awards' seem to be part of this pattern



  11. Saint-Germain's Poisonous Legacy of "Toxic Loans": The Cautionary Tale of SIDRU and Its “Toxic Loans”

    The town where the EPO‘s President (Battistelli) is a deputy mayor has a track record of financial hardship and alleged financial misconduct, attributed to the same financial practices Battistelli has just implemented at the EPO



  12. Links 23/5/2018: DragonFlyBSD 5.2.1 and Kata Containers 1.0 Released

    Links for the day



  13. Masking Abstract Patents in the Age of Alice/§ 101 in the United States

    There are new examples and ample evidence of § 101-dodging strategies; the highest US court, however, wishes to limit patent scope and revert back to an era of patent sanity (as opposed to patent maximalism)



  14. PTAB's Latest Applications of 35 U.S.C. § 101 and Obviousness Tests to Void U.S. Patents

    Validity checks at PTAB continue to strike out patents, much to the fear of people who have made a living from patenting and lawsuits alone



  15. France is Irrelevant to Whether or Not UPC Ever Becomes a Reality, Moving/Outsourcing de Facto Patent Examination to European Courts Managed in/Presided by France

    Team UPC is still focusing on France as if it's up for France to decide the fate of the UPC, which EPO insiders say Battistelli wants to be the chief of (the chief, it has already been decided, would have to be a Frenchman)



  16. Saint-Germain's Poisonous Legacy of "Toxic Loans": The Emperor’s New Investment Guidelines

    Details about a secret vote to 'gamble' the EPO's budget on "a diversified portfolio managed by external experts"



  17. Saint-Germain's Poisonous Legacy of "Toxic Loans": Cautionary Tale for the EPO?

    Preface or background to a series of posts about Battistelli's French politics and why they can if not should alarm EPO workers



  18. Links 22/5/2018: Parrot 4.0, Spectre Number 4

    Links for the day



  19. Chamber of Commerce Lies About the United States Like It Lies About Other Countries for the Sole Purpose of Patent Maximalism

    When pressure groups that claim to be "US" actively bash and lie about the US one has to question their motivation; in the case of the Chamber of Commerce, it's just trying to perturb the law for the worse



  20. Links 21/5/2018: Linux 4.17 RC6, GIMP 2.10.2

    Links for the day



  21. The Attacks on the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) Have Lost Momentum and the Patent Microcosm Begrudgingly Gives Up

    The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), reaffirmed by the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) and now the Supreme Court as well, carries on preventing frivolous lawsuits; options for stopping PTAB have nearly been exhausted and it shows



  22. Software Patenting and Successful Litigation a Very Difficult Task Under 35 U.S.C. § 101

    Using loads of misleading terms or buzzwords such as "AI" the patent microcosm continues its software patents pursuits; but that's mostly failing, especially when courts come to assess pertinent claims made in the patents



  23. António Campinos Will Push Toward a France-Based Unified Patent Court (UPC)

    Frenchmen at EPO will try hard to bring momentum if not force to the Unified Patent Court; facts, however, aren't on their side (unlike Team UPC, which was always on Team Battistelli's side)



  24. In Apple v Samsung Patents That Should Never Have Been Granted May Result in a Billion Dollars in 'Damages'

    A roundup of news about Apple and its patent cases (especially Apple v Samsung), including Intel's role trying to intervene in Qualcomm v Apple



  25. Links 20/5/2018: KDevelop 5.2.2 and 5.2.3, FreeBSD 11.2 Beta 2

    Links for the day



  26. Aurélien Pétiaud's ILO Case (EPO Appeal) an Early Sign That ILO Protects Abusers and Power, Not Workers

    A famous EPO ‘disciplinary’ case is recalled; it’s another one of those EPO-leaning rulings from AT-ILO, which not only praises Battistelli amid very serious abuses but also lies on his behalf, leaving workers with no real access to justice but a mere illusion thereof



  27. LOT Network is a Wolf in Sheep's Clothing

    Another reminder that the "LOT" is a whole lot more than it claims to be and in effect a reinforcer of the status quo



  28. 'Nokification' in Hong Kong and China (PRC)

    Chinese firms that are struggling resort to patent litigation, in effect repeating the same misguided trajectories which became so notorious in Western nations because they act as a form of taxation, discouraging actual innovation



  29. CIPU is Amplifying Misleading Propaganda From the Chamber of Commerce

    Another lobbying event is set up to alarm lawmakers and officials, telling them that the US dropped from first to twelfth using some dodgy yardstick which favours patent extremists



  30. Patent Law Firms That Profit From Software Patent Applications and Lawsuits Still 'Pull a Berkheimer' to Attract Business in Vain

    The Alice-inspired (Supreme Court) 35 U.S.C. § 101 remains unchanged, but the patent microcosm endlessly mentions a months-old decision from a lower court (than the Supreme Court) to 'sell' the impression that everything is changing and software patents have just found their 'teeth' again


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