decoration decoration
Stories

GROKLAW
When you want to know more...
decoration
For layout only
Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines
ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books

Gear

Groklaw Gear

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.


You won't find me on Facebook


Donate

Donate Paypal


No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.


What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments


Sponsors

Hosting:
hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster
Re:MS helping OSS | 348 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
Only when forced to
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, April 09 2013 @ 06:38 PM EDT

Only when MS was found to be making use of GPL'd code improperly and were faced with the usual situation:

    stop doing it or comply
Only then, did they actually comply with the GPL terms.

Not that people like myself want their code ;)

RAS

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Seems like FUD to me.
Authored by: Ronny on Wednesday, April 10 2013 @ 12:45 AM EDT
Nobody's stopping you from distributing Windows for free, but you're going to
have to pay Microsoft one Windows licence fee for every copy you give away....
and you'll probably need to register as a reseller or OEM.

You probably won't be popular with other OEMs, either, but MS will LOVE you.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Re:MS helping OSS
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, April 10 2013 @ 02:01 AM EDT
I have heard it said that they did. In fact, OSS, and Linux in particular,
could not have grown the way they did without Microsoft. Hear me out.

In ancient times, software was largely open source. It was also hardware vendor
specific, so it was managed by the vendor. People had to compile for their
particular hardware, and sent in patches to fix bugs and provide new features.
Since a program only ran on a particular vendor's hardware, it was seen as a way
to sell that hardware. Licensing was largely ignored.

With the rise of cross platform software and personal computing, proprietary
software began to take hold. With software itself seen as a product, closing
the source was seen as necessary to secure income. Many of the old open
systems, including Unix, were forced closed by their vendors, effectively
stealing their users' contributions.[1] Having lost its foothold, open source
was marginalized, and proprietary software took over.

Microsoft, through their anti-trust behaviour, killed most of the independent
proprietary software vendors.[2] The more ethical ones died particularly
quickly, and OS vendors fared the worst. Even Apple, with all of their tricks,
barely survived them.[3] This gave them a solid monopoly as an OS vendor,
allowing them to destroy application markets as well. Many people lost their
favourite programs and operating systems. Microsoft also abused their own
customers. Shoddy products to keep them on the upgrade treadmill, and draconian
license agreements enforced with police powers[4] created a lot of anger. Many
will never forgive them. Ever.[5]

However, by being a near-perfect predator, they created an environment where
only OSS could survive them. With most of the real competition killed off, and
a highly motivated population no longer able to trust proprietary software, it
was able to grow very quickly, and now seems to have reached critical mass.

[1] This is what made the whole BSD lawsuit so much fun ;)
It was also a factor in the creation of 'copyleft' and the GPL.

[2] During the last anti-trust class action lawsuit against MS in the US, the
prosecutor had to turn away plaintiffs because the court was overwhelmed by so
many. BeOS was one of these.

[3] For a while Microsoft was actually funding Apple to keep it alive so they
could claim they had competition in court. IIRC the judge was not impressed.

[4] The Business Software Alliance, which is Microsoft and some of its business
partners, conducts surprise raids on businesses, with police escort.
Non-compliance seems to be settled by a combination of a fine and buying
Microsoft products.

[5] Consider this point the next time you see a rabid Microsoft hater. It seems
to be a common reaction when someone finally breaks free of them, and can take a
long time to settle out.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )