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

06.30.09

More People Say “No” to Mono, Including the Software Freedom Law Center (SFLC)

Posted in FSF, GNU/Linux, Law, Microsoft, Mono, Novell, Patents, TomTom, Ubuntu at 4:04 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Summary: More opposition to Mono surfaces, detailed explanations offered

AS we pointed out over the weekend [1, 2], the SFLC and FSF are in alignment with Richard Stallman's views on Mono and so are many others. But Bradley Kuhn has just made it more official with a long essay at the SFLC’s Web site. It’s a recommended read.

In an essay last Friday entitled Why free software shouldn’t depend on Mono or C#, RMS argued a key point that I agree with: the software freedom community should minimize its use of programming language infrastructure that comes primarily from anti-software-freedom companies, notwithstanding FaiF (Free as in Freedom) implementations. I’ve been thinking about an extension of that argument: that language infrastructure created in a community process is likely more resilient against attacks from proprietary software companies.

Here is another new perspective:

I think it is interesting that he thinks that it is the “‘best technology’ Linux camp” that is the camp that offers the greatest threat to Microsoft. I can understand why some may think that this is true since this camp is creating flashy and very useful products and features that increase the appeal of Linux. However, mono is not the only tool that the “‘best technology’ Linux camp” has at its disposal. Many view the use of the Qt toolkit as a better alternative, and one that does not have the risk associated with mono. Furthermore, I do not agree with the thought that “‘best technology’ Linux camp” is the one that Microsoft feels most threatened by. I think Microsoft is only threatened by the combination of both camps.

I view mono as a distraction for FOSS developers. Yes, there are some practical advantages in its use, but there are a lot of questions surrounding it. It has the potential of dividing the two mayor camps of Linux contributors. It will be interesting to see what comes out of this controversy.

Since Nokia’s Qt toolkit is mentioned above, here is what KDE developers say on the subject (mind the good comments) and here is what Jack Wallen thinks about Novell’s role.

If Microsoft is threatening patents against .NET, it would seem to me that the Novell/Microsoft relationship didn’t really work out all that well. And now Microsoft is back to their old tricks. And what should the Linux and open source community do about this? Should another deal with Microsoft be made? Is the seamless communication between Linux and Windows worth making a deal with a partner that is only going to turn around and stab you in the back again and again and again?

The Register on the lessons to be learned from TomTom:

Although Stallman frequently speaks about the dangers of software patents on open-source, trust for Microsoft has run particularly thin recently because of the company’s legal attack on TomTom over a FAT patent dispute.

Stallman urged the community to instead distribute and recommend non-C# applications whenever possible to avoid Redmond lawyers from being able to disable major OS functions on a whim.

Microsoft neither retracted nor backed its accusations against Linux. Horacio Gutierrez from Microsoft said about Linux that “there is an overwhelming number of patents being infringed.” He named not even a single one, but Mono is an easy target and also a very unique one.

GNU/Linux users do not want Mono. Well, maybe with the exception of SUSE and Canonical, whose desktop engineering manager comes from Microsoft. In response to the many discussions stemming from Stallman’s essay, Canonical has published yet another statement about Mono.

The Ubuntu Technical Board has been asked for a position statement on the use of C#, specifically the Mono implementation, by applications in Ubuntu.

These applications, as well as the Mono stack, were proposed for inclusion like any other application and underwent the same review process that all new applications and platforms undergo before being accepted into the archive.

With specific regard to the default installed application set, applications have been reviewed and compared against each other on merit and features. These often take place during the Ubuntu Developer Summits, most recently over the default media player.

For those who prefer Ubuntu (like myself), here is a handy new guide: “How to Completely Remove Mono on Ubuntu”

What Microsoft has
What Microsoft has

What Microsoft wants
What Microsoft wants

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

8 Comments

  1. _Mutex_ said,

    June 30, 2009 at 8:00 pm

    Gravatar

    Im guessing those blobs are not to scale otherwise the FOSS one would be a tiny dot, and does FOSS believe they owe C/C++ ? or that C/C++ was derived from free software ?

    I know Roy you do not like to let facts get in the way of your case, and that you will not tolerate anyone making reasoned arguments to you that are against your preconceived biases.

    Thats why you will not telerate anyone with a valid counter argument to enter into a debate on the subject with you or anyone in your IRC cult.

    It’s sad, that if you surround yourself with “yes” people you will (and have) gotten a very biased world view.

    It is clear you have such a narrow view, and your refusal to allow any reasonable debate on any subject shows everyone how scared you are of having your cult see you for what you really are.

    What everyone else see’s you as. It’s beyond most sane people to understand how you can be so bitter and hatefull against a business or a company. It’s very pathological.

    Im not trying to make it a personal attack, just pointing out what most people perceive you to be.

  2. vexorian said,

    June 30, 2009 at 9:45 pm

    Gravatar

    Bleh reallly, even ignoring that rather lame personal attack up there (it seems the mono zealots are getting worse and worse with time) this situation sucks

    Did you read the Mono position statement? It is a ridiculous piece of BS.

    For those who prefer Ubuntu (like myself), here is a handy new guide: “How to Completely Remove Mono on Ubuntu” █

    It is non-sense to prefer ubuntu, as it is clear Canonical doesn’t give a damn or is even pro-Mono in these regards, the “statement” you just linked is something I see as my definite sign to move to another distro.

    This sucks as I really like ubuntu, and getting used to other distro’s quirks might be annoying, I am wishing for someone to make a remix without this absurd Mono in the default that I could actually advertize to people and friends without being ashamed of advertizing a FOSS alternative to MS software that heavily relies on MS tech and patents.

    I see this position statement as a rather clear sign to jump off the ubuntu boat, it is absolutely ridiculous.

    The Ubuntu Project takes patent issues seriously

    If only it did.

    The Ubuntu Technical Board has received no claims of infringement
    against the Mono stack, and is not aware of any such claims having been
    received by other similar projects.

    In other words, they are freaking WAITING for MS to begin suing which is actually the most ridiculous strategy ever. It shows clear lack of vision and responsibility from part of the ubuntu project. This makes me feel extremely uneasy to think that ubuntu’s future is in the hands of such irresponsible people.

    PJ at Groklaw the other day implied that Canonical probably does not care as MS is likely to sue users and not vendors. Probably that’s the reason red hat has done so much to avoid Mono recently as they actually are responsible for whatever lawsuit their users suffer. Canonical’s philosophy is now noticeably “screw users, as long as our asses are fine” . So, when the patent attacks come, they’ll just stop shipping Mono, and pretend it is all fine while companies using ubuntu get sued terribly, that’s fine and dandy.

    It is common practice in the software industry to register patents as
    protection against litigation, rather than as an intent to litigate.

    I believe in Fairies as well, lest ignore MS’ freaking patent claims, the damn exclusive patent deal for Mono they have with Novell.

    (While the Ubuntu project wishes to be responsive to patent infringement
    claims, we cannot commit to the assessment and review of claims made by
    anyone other than the registered rights holder.)

    Were these guys living under a rock since 2006?

    The most ridiculous of the whole statement is that their logic is that “they think” Mono is ok patent-wise and completely ignore and disregard the remaining complaints against Mono which are not based on legal issues or fear but because of how terrible of an idea it is to make the default setup depend on MS created, patented and dependent technology. Not to mention the technological downsides of Mono, all very important issues that they are simply ignoring. For them just thinking that Mono is not a patent threat makes it good enough for the default.

    But the worst, most ridiculous and offensive part of this statement is :

    Since the Mono stack is already a dependency of the default installation
    set for many remixes of Ubuntu, including the Desktop Edition, there is
    no reason to consider a dependency on Mono as an issue when suggesting
    applications for the default set.

    ARRGGGGGGG!

    Holy chicken and egg issue we have here, really, this is so ridiculous. Seems ubuntu will keep getting Mono apps and consider it not an issue because it already has Mono apps. They’ll accept Mono in the default because Mono is in the default.

    I have lost of my hopes about ubuntu fixing this. And that’s all while Red hat and other fronts were giving so great signals and working so hard in improving the deal. I really think it is time Linux gets a new flag distro cause the current one is in a hopeless state right now.

    David "Lefty" Schlesinger Reply:

    I really think it is time Linux gets a new flag distro cause the current one is in a hopeless state right now.

    Well, the process by which Ubuntu is put together is pretty well-understood. It doesn’t, as it happens, involve reading postings from this site demanding that they drop that process and simply accede to your demands.

    Perhaps, rather than spending your time “advocating” (i.e. whining about a well-established process in which you don’t participate, on the grounds that it produces results you don’t happen to enjoy), you folks should put your energies toward creating such a “flag distro”. It’d be a much better use of your time that posting here, I’d thing, and a lot more productive of the sorts of results you’re (pointlessly) demanding.

    It’s the open source way, dude.

  3. vexorian said,

    June 30, 2009 at 9:50 pm

    Gravatar

    Just installing ubuntu and then removing Mono is not a solution. It is a patch. We need to stop using ubuntu or at least try to make a remix that doesn’t ship with it by default. If we keep using ubuntu and just removing Mono what will happen is that the people that we help move to Linux risk not being conscious about this and they won’t remove it. Canonical would also see the amount of downloads as a sign that everything is ok, which is not the message they must receive.

    Jose_X Reply:

    Right, a solution would be a remix or different distro that solves the problem centrally once for everyone. Maybe such a distro can put up a statement about the goals of the distro so that people know what to expect in the future.

    Hopefully, Ubuntu will come to their senses if the SCOTUS rules unfavorably on software patents in the next few months.

    If the ruling goes well, then the story changes some, but I still would not use Ubuntu. I have been moving away from Windows, not towards it. However, maybe Canonical will want to attack Microsoft’s market head on to work at getting MSdotnet users to switch to mono/Ubuntu.

    I don’t see too many positive reasons to jump the gun before the SCOTUS ruling (though it might add only a little clarity), unless perhaps Canonical thinks it can pressure Microsoft ahead of the ruling or else get evidence useful for arguing against software patents.

    Canonical’s attitude of waiting for specific patent accusations might make sense for them, but I’d rather promote other distros while Canonical carries out their little experiments.

    Marcelo Reply:

    I fully agree. I have been an enthusiast of Ubuntu since years ago. It’s hard to believe that they have such thought on these clear attacks against free software. I am very surprised and disappointed.

    I am removing the Ubuntu based distro from my machine and will install Fedora right now. Hopefully more and more people get conscious on what is behind such apparently inoffensive “cross platform” initiative.

    PS: I have nothing against companies or people who wants to make money. I just don’t like companies that don’t want to play a fair game o which all player are under the same rules. I do not like companies that use the “Embrace, Extend and Extinguish” tactic. That’s all.

    Marcelo
    Regards from Brazil

  4. max stirner said,

    July 1, 2009 at 2:16 am

    Gravatar

    So pleased the old garde have finally come up with some statements & put their weight in..

    Roy Schestowitz Reply:

    People are woken up by it.

What Else is New


  1. Continued Erosion of Software Patents in the US and With It a Demise in Abusive Litigation by Patent Trolls

    Encouraging signs of patent scope tightening/improvement at the US patent system, bolstered by inter partes reviews which crowdsource (or crowdfund) so as to defang serial abusers that rely on dubious software patents



  2. EPO Crushed the Boards of Appeal (i.e. Quality Control) and Insiders Explain Why

    Team Battistelli has made a complete mockery of the EPO and also serves to devalue EPO patents, which in the long term can doom the whole system



  3. Academic Discussion About Patents' Harm and Good, Pushers of Software Patents Still Upset at Alice Decision

    In light of the Alice case, large monopolies and their messengers moan about patent quality control, whereas here in Manchester people have an open debate about the potential harms of over-patenting



  4. Links 30/7/2016: Sysadmin Day, Stardew Valley on GNU/Linux

    Links for the day



  5. Links 29/7/2016: More Microsoft Problems and Layoffs, Bodhi Linux 4.0.0 Alpha Released

    Links for the day



  6. Links 28/7/2016: CORD as Linux Foundation Project, Wine 1.9.15 Released

    Links for the day



  7. EPO Loses More Than 80% of Cases at the International Labour Organisation (ILO)

    The International Labour Organisation (or Organization) helps show just to what degree the European Patent Office (EPO) violates the rights of workers



  8. To Understand What Battistelli Has Turned the EPO Into Look at Turkey and China

    Battistelli and his notorious Vice-President from SIPO (Croatia) turn the European Patent Office, once the pride of Europe, into a human rights cesspool with SIPO (China) connections



  9. Patent Lawyers Move Closer to Battistelli's Rubber-stamping Office While the Appeal Boards Pushed Away as Collective Punishment Which Masks Decline in Patent Quality

    Urgently sending appeal boards away and urgently granting applicants patents without proper examination will be Battistelli's sorrow legacy at the European Patent Office



  10. Software Patents a Dying Breed, But Patent Lawyers in Denial Over it and Notorious Judge Rodney Gilstrap Ignores Alice (Supreme Court)

    A look at what law and practice are saying about software patents, contrasted or contradicted by the patent industry and trolls-friendly courts (which make business out of or together with patent aggressors)



  11. CAFC Meddling in PTAB Affairs; Unified Patents Fights a Good Fight by Invalidating Software Patents

    A look at how the AIA's Patent Trial and Appeal Board is invalidating software patents post-Alice, with or without involvement of patent courts



  12. Early Certainty That Benoît Battistelli is Dangerously Clueless and a Major Risk to the EPO

    The chaos which Team Battistelli is assured to deliver if it doesn't treat scientists like scientists, instead viewing them as a production line with rubber-stamping duties



  13. OIN Makes Claims About “Open Source Innovation”, But It Produces Nothing and Protects Virtually Nobody

    The Open Invention Network (OIN) reports growth, but in practical terms it does little or nothing to help developers of Free/Open Source software



  14. Links 27/7/2016: New CrossOver, Blackmagic for GNU/Linux

    Links for the day



  15. The Death of Software Patents and Microsoft's Coup Against Yahoo! Made the Company Worthless

    A look at what happens to companies whose value is a house of software patents rather than code and a broad base of users/customers



  16. Munich Attack Mentioned by EPO But Not Ansbach

    The EPO does the usual right-wing thing (exploiting disaster/emergency for domestic crackdowns), but some bemoan the omission of the explosion at Ansbach (also in Germany)



  17. Kluwer Thinks People Are Clueless About the Unitary Patent System and Pretends It's Business as Usual

    Flogging the dead UPC horse at times of great uncertainty (enough to bring the UPC to a standstill)



  18. Almost Everything That the Government Accountability Office Says is Applicable to the EPO

    The Government Accountability Office in the United States produces reports which can serve as a timely warning sign to the European Patent Office, where patent quality is rapidly declining in order to meet 'production' goals



  19. Microsoft Says It Loves Linux, But Its Anti-Linux Patent Trolls Are Still Around and Active

    Highlighting just two of the many entities that Microsoft (and partners) use in order to induce additional costs on Free (as in freedom) software



  20. Links 26/7/2016: Microsoft Growing Desperate, Linux 4.8 Visions

    Links for the day



  21. Links 25/7/2016: Linux 4.7 Final, PostgreSQL 9.6 Beta 3

    Links for the day



  22. Leaked: Boards of Appeal Face 'Exile' or 'Extradition' in Haar After Standing up to Battistelli

    A look at some of the latest moves at the European Patent Office (EPO), following Battistelli's successful coup d’état which brought the EPO into a perpetual state of emergency that perpetuates Battistelli's totalitarian powers



  23. The US Government Accountability Office (GAO) Comes Across as Against Software Patents, Relates to the EPO as Well

    Some analysis of the input from the Government Accountability Office (GAO) with focus on the EPO and software patents



  24. In the US, Patent Trolls Engage in Patent Wars and Shakedowns, Whereas in China/Korea Large Android OEMs Sue One Another

    Highlighting some of the differences between the US patent system and other patent systems



  25. Links 24/7/2016: Elive 2.7.1 Beta, New Flatpaks and Snaps

    Links for the day



  26. Links 23/7/2016: Leo Laporte on GNU/Linux, Dolphin Emulator’s Vulkan Completion

    Links for the day



  27. Links 22/7/2016: Wine 1.9.15, KaOS 2016.07 ISO

    Links for the day



  28. Haar Mentioned as Likely Site of Appeal Boards as Their Eradication or Marginalisation Envisioned by UPC Proponent Benoît Battistelli

    Not only the Staff Union of the European Patent Office (SUEPO) is under severe attack and possibly in mortal danger; the increasingly understaffed Boards of Appeal too are coming under attack and may (according to rumours) be sent to Haar, a good distance away from Munich and the airport (half an hour drive), not to mention lack of facilities for visitors from overseas



  29. EPO Attaché Albert Keyack Viewed as Somewhat of a Mole, Reporting From the US Embassy in Brazil Until Shortly Before the Temer Coup

    Public responses to the role played by Albert Keyack on behalf of the United States inside the European [sic] Patent Office



  30. EPO Insiders Explain Why the EPO's Examination Quality Rapidly Declines and Will Get Even Worse Because of Willy Minnoye

    Public comments from anonymous insiders serve to highlight a growing crisis inside the European Patent Office (EPO), where experienced/senior examiners are walking away and leaving an irreplaceable bunch of seats (due to high experience demands)


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