Re: "Why Mono is Currently An Unacceptable Risk"

[Rob S. Pierre]

"anoncoward" <anoncoward@my-deja.com> wrote:

> > And tomorrow he works the fields to build more.
> Does he?
> Or does he spray the fields with DDT?
> Ask for the license.

Found on theserverside.net
(posted by a Microsoft-employee)

+
+
+
"
 Disclaimer: I work for Microsoft.

Two things.
First. What exactly does Mr Nickell mean by "if Microsoft doesn't have
weasel room".

Does he mean, "if Microsoft doesn't try to protect its intellectual
property"?

Hypothetically speaking, if organization A engages in an effort to copy
intellectual property (including patents) that belongs to organization B,
and B tries to stop A, who is the weasel? I am not saying this applies in
this particular case, because I don't know all the details.

Second. Mr Nickell's main concern seems to be whether the C# and CLI, and
the MS patents required for implementatio, are "friendly" toward "Free
Software", that is to say, GPL. But Mono is licensed under an X-style
license. Mono doesn't experience this conflict.

So it's not "the risk of Mono" but instead, "the mismatch of Mono and GPL".
"
+
+
+
There is a "licence-problem". The Mono-compiler is GPL.