http://neuro.me.uk/2006/11/03/microsoft-and-novell-man-love/ Are you one-point-oh? Sat, 13 Feb 2010 17:07:28 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 http://neuro.me.uk/2006/11/03/microsoft-and-novell-man-love/comment-page-1/#comment-42057 Ted Haeger Fri, 03 Nov 2006 16:11:51 +0000 http://neuro.me.uk/2006/11/03/microsoft-and-novell-man-love/#comment-42057 Right on, Neuro! Right on, Neuro!

]]> http://neuro.me.uk/2006/11/03/microsoft-and-novell-man-love/comment-page-1/#comment-42055 sil Fri, 03 Nov 2006 14:52:48 +0000 http://neuro.me.uk/2006/11/03/microsoft-and-novell-man-love/#comment-42055 Indisputably it's good for Microsoft, Novell, Microsoft's customers, and Novell's customers. My concern is that it's bad for the FOSS world that isn't Novell. The point here is; what if, say, Microsoft decide that Mono infringes some of their patents? Novell and SuSE users are protected; the rest of us get hung out to dry. If MIcrosoft weren't going to sue then Novell wouldn't have needed the agreement, no? So to my mind it makes it more likely that everyone else will equally have to enter into a patent cross-licencing agreement, which is problematic for FOSS entities that aren't big companies like Novell (OK, so Red Hat and Canonical can do so, but what about Damn Small Linux, for example?) Indisputably it’s good for Microsoft, Novell, Microsoft’s customers, and Novell’s customers. My concern is that it’s bad for the FOSS world that isn’t Novell. The point here is; what if, say, Microsoft decide that Mono infringes some of their patents? Novell and SuSE users are protected; the rest of us get hung out to dry. If MIcrosoft weren’t going to sue then Novell wouldn’t have needed the agreement, no? So to my mind it makes it more likely that everyone else will equally have to enter into a patent cross-licencing agreement, which is problematic for FOSS entities that aren’t big companies like Novell (OK, so Red Hat and Canonical can do so, but what about Damn Small Linux, for example?)

]]>