[More Open Than Open]: “I am constantly amazed at the flexibility of this single word.”

--Jason Matusow, Microsoft (for background see [1, 2, 3])

Microsoft favours licences that are incompatible with things that are not beneficial to its shareholders. Public investments come before developers and the better example from this week is probably Singularity, which is a Microsoft project begging for free labour. The agenda is disguised under more inviting terms like "open source", which it is not (Microsoft's confusion was nonetheless fruitful).

As with the image of blind justice to the right, you can look but you better not touch.

[...]

It is true that some academics who like to play with Microsoft code, and support Microsoft technologies like .Net, will find value here.

But everyone else needs to be wary. Lawyers bite. And Microsoft’s are hungry.

This is not the first time that Microsoft plays games with pseudo-open source licences. In fact, the company routinely lies about open source, causing the 'brand' to suffer as a whole. The question is, will Michael Tiemann take note of this pattern and respond? ⬆