Re: [LUG] M$ at it..

[Simon Waters <Simon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

nick@xxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> On 23 Jul 2002, Neil Stone wrote:
>
> > uhh.. am i just being stupid or does that look very very similar to the
> > GPL ?
>
> [fx: looks]
>
> No, it's explicitly anti-commercial.  The GPL has no problem with
> commercial use, only with certain forms of take-and-no-give
> redistribution.

I agree - nothing like the GPL.

I think it is even more intellectual property infringing than
the GPL ;) Talk about hypocrisy.

In that if I accidentally use such a piece of software I can't
sell the proceeds of my labour, where as if I accidentally use
GPL code I can still use the proceeds of my labour to make
money. Well that would be Microsoft's argument on the other side
of the fence.

Clause 7 is wonderful, now is that anti-patent, or is it the
biggest club to force people never to sue Microsoft over
software patent infringement. i.e. If we steal your patented
technology that enhances .NET, and you sue us, your right to use
.NET ceases. Read as "Sue us and you might as well cut your own
legs off".

--
The Mailing List for the Devon & Cornwall LUG
Mail majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxx with "unsubscribe list" in the
message body to unsubscribe.