[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       opensim-users
Subject:    [Opensim-users] Microsoft issues patent promise, dispels Mono 	legal concerns
From:       adam () deepthink ! com ! au (Frisby, Adam)
Date:       2009-07-21 19:00:19
Message-ID: 63FAD4F222230A4EA79DE9E8BE6647352095A520 () winxbeus19 ! exchange ! xchg
[Download RAW message or body]

Sure, if you want to define missing ADO.NET & ASP as crippled - Mono is quite \
functional without those two components (they aren't part of any standard). I would \
wager and say at least 70-80% of Mono-compatible software will run without adjustment \
if either of those are missing (perhaps higher)

Adam

From: opensim-users-bounces@lists.berlios.de [mailto:opensim-users-bounces at \
                lists.berlios.de] On Behalf Of lamont cranston
Sent: Tuesday, 21 July 2009 4:55 AM
To: opensim-users at lists.berlios.de
Subject: Re: [Opensim-users] Microsoft issues patent promise, dispels Mono legal \
concerns


"The point is to divide it into "fully functional, with crippled mono" and "legally \
dubious" distributions.

There, fixed it for you.

On Tue, Jul 14, 2009 at 10:56 PM, Frisby, Adam <adam at deepthink.com.au<mailto:adam \
at deepthink.com.au>> wrote:

It is harmless.



The point is to divide it into "completely paranoid" and "fully functional" \
distributions. Microsoft's not going to sue Novell while they are both doing highly \
profitable consulting together on Linux/Windows integration; and suing something 5-10 \
years after it starts and you were aware of it, after releasing the original for free \
(see Rotor); tends to result in the case getting nixed on estoppel.



Adam



From: opensim-users-bounces@lists.berlios.de<mailto:opensim-users-bounces at \
lists.berlios.de> [mailto:opensim-users-bounces at \
lists.berlios.de<mailto:opensim-users-bounces at lists.berlios.de>] On Behalf Of \
                lamont cranston
Sent: Tuesday, 14 July 2009 6:50 PM

To: opensim-users at lists.berlios.de<mailto:opensim-users at lists.berlios.de>
Subject: Re: [Opensim-users] Microsoft issues patent promise, dispels Mono legal \
concerns



Microsoft Mono move means exactly nothing

http://www.itwire.com/content/view/26224/1090/
http://www.softwarefreedom.org/resources/2008/osp-gpl.html

De Icaza announced that Mono will be split in half. "In the next few months we will \
be working towards splitting the jumbo Mono source code that includes ECMA + A lot \
more into two separate source code distributions," he explains, "One will be ECMA, \
the other will contain our implementation of ASP.NET<http://ASP.NET>, \
ADO.NET<http://ADO.NET>, Winforms and others."

After all the talk that Mono was "harmless",  why the sudden awareness of the risk?


On Mon, Jul 13, 2009 at 1:00 AM, Frisby, Adam <adam at deepthink.com.au<mailto:adam \
at deepthink.com.au>> wrote:

Oh lord.



The point is quite simple -

Mono is based on the EMCA 334/335 and ISO/IEC23270:2006 standards, those standards \
allow components within them to be patent, provided they are licensable under 'RAND' \
terms (Reasonable And Non-Discriminatory). The shadow hanging over Mono was that \
Microsoft could charge a "reasonable" sum for whatever components within that may be \
patented/[able].



By putting EMCA 334/335 into the community pledge means Microsoft has waived the \
right to collect those terms (in whole.), the exceptions are components of C# which \
are not in the ECMA standards, these are - ASP.NET<http://ASP.NET> (* - although \
there is a Microsoft implementation in under the MSPL I believe, which voids the \
threat there[?]), ADO.NET<http://ADO.NET> (used for database access to MSSQL, etc), \
WinForms[?] and some components of the Microsoft.* namespace.



Because of this - Mono have started separating their packages, so you can get a \
'clean' version, and a 'potentially has issues' version (ie the version with ASP, \
ADO, etc). The good news is, OpenSim will run on the 'clean' version - the only \
exception to this will be the MSSQL adapter which relies on ADO.net - however given \
that anyone using that adapter will also be very likely using .NET, I don't believe \
that is a problem.



Ubuntu already ships a separated distribution of Mono which allows you to only \
optionally install the bits that aren't covered by the patent pledge.



Adam



From: opensim-users-bounces@lists.berlios.de<mailto:opensim-users-bounces at \
lists.berlios.de> [mailto:opensim-users-bounces at \
lists.berlios.de<mailto:opensim-users-bounces at lists.berlios.de>] On Behalf Of \
                lamont cranston
Sent: Sunday, 12 July 2009 11:04 AM
To: opensim-users at lists.berlios.de<mailto:opensim-users at lists.berlios.de>
Subject: Re: [Opensim-users] Microsoft issues patent promise, dispels Mono legal \
concerns



Saying that it "clears up a bit of the FUD around Mono" seems counter intuitive. It \
would seem to have validated the claim that Mono relies on Microsoft patented \
technology. Microsoft seems to have just declared that it does.  Fact is not FUD.
You don't need amnesty if you are innocent.

I'm more interested in why Microsoft felt that this is a good idea? Mono is so far \
below the public relations radar that it is invisible to 99% of the public. What is \
in it for Microsoft to release this announcement at this time?

On Tue, Jul 7, 2009 at 4:42 PM, Ethan Grammatikidis <eekee57 at \
fastmail.fm<mailto:eekee57 at fastmail.fm>> wrote:

On Tue, 7 Jul 2009 13:13:40 -0700
Kyle Hamilton <aerowolf at gmail.com<mailto:aerowolf at gmail.com>> wrote:

> On Tue, Jul 7, 2009 at 11:44 AM, Ethan Grammatikidis<eekee57 at \
> fastmail.fm<mailto:eekee57 at fastmail.fm>> wrote:
> > On Tue, 07 Jul 2009 17:00:20 +0000
> > Opensource Obscure <open at autistici.org<mailto:open at autistici.org>> wrote:
> > 
> > > 
> > > At a first glance this is good news for Opensim users and
> > > developers that use Linux. I'd like to hear comments,
> > > especially from free-software advocates.
> > > 
> > > Microsoft issues patent promise, dispels Mono legal concerns
> > > from Ars Technica - http://bit.ly/BasCG or
> > > http://arstechnica.com/microsoft/news/2009/07/microsoft-issues-patent-promise-dispels-mono-concerns.ars
> > > 
> > 
> > Just wondering how binding this promise is. I guess MS couldn't break it without \
> > getting themselves bad press, but there's always a possibility of a company \
> > finding itself in a tight corner & thinking maybe it's worth breaking this. I \
> > find myself wondering if some, perhaps many big businesses are designed to run as \
> > if they're in a tight corner all the time.
> 
> 
> I'm not a lawyer, but I've learned a lot from Groklaw. This is not
> legal advice, simply my interpretation of what I've read :):
> 
> The legal principle involved is called "estoppel" -- if you make a
> promise not to sue someone for doing B, and then they in good faith
> rely on that promise and do B, you can't go back on your word and sue
> them for it anyway.  If the promise was made by the rightsholder (and
> the fact that they issued it as a press release in written form), if
> they try, they will have the court rule against them.  It's been this
> way since before we had a legal system in the US, and imported
> England's.

Really good to know, thanks. :)

> 
> (Technically, this is the same thing that a license is: you receive a
> promise from the person who grants the license that they will not sue
> you.  It doesn't matter if you pay for it or not.)
> 
> This "promise" can be looked at as a "license" as far as CLR runtimes
> go: if someone tries to create a functional CLR implementation, they
> have a license to any necessary patent claims that Microsoft holds
> that must be infringed in order to adhere to the standard.  This
> license does not extend to non-CLR technologies, though.
> 
> Again, IANAL.  Check with an IP lawyer if you want to.

Strong enough reasoning for me. *nod*

--
Ethan Grammatikidis

Those who are slower at parsing information must
necessarily be faster at problem-solving.
_______________________________________________

Opensim-users mailing list
Opensim-users at lists.berlios.de<mailto:Opensim-users at lists.berlios.de>
https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-users



--
(\__/)
(='.'=)
(")_(")

_______________________________________________
Opensim-users mailing list
Opensim-users at lists.berlios.de<mailto:Opensim-users at lists.berlios.de>
https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-users



--
(\__/)
(='.'=)
(")_(")

_______________________________________________
Opensim-users mailing list
Opensim-users at lists.berlios.de<mailto:Opensim-users at lists.berlios.de>
https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-users



--
(\__/)
(='.'=)
(")_(")
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.berlios.de/pipermail/opensim-users/attachments/20090721/78eaae7b/attachment.html>



[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]