> There definitely aren't any legal issues regarding the fact that there > are dependencies on .NET.
In the larger FOSS community, there is substantial fear about Microsoft leveraging "submarine patents" within the .NET platform. While that may be both irrational and irrelevant here, I thought it wise to discuss licensing compatibility between this project and the licensing terms of the .NET Framework. Do you have a good reference for the .NET Framework licensing agreement? Are there choices of licenses? While I'm fairly certain we have no cause for concern here, I think careful review and consideration of the licensing agreement is for everyone's benefit. > Regarding the trademarks, I don't think MS has a trademark on .NET, > specifically, but rather the logo. > http://www.microsoft.com/about/legal/en/us/IntellectualProperty/Trademar > ks/EN-US.aspx Thanks for citing that. > Putting .NET or dotnet somewhere in a product name is a pretty common > practice Sure. > (ex. Apache's Lucene.NET and log4net, Spring.NET, Oracle's > ODP.NET, Red Gate's .NET Reflector and .NET Developer Bundle, Paint.NET, > DotNetNuke, Dotnet247.com, DotNetKicks.com, DotNetSlackers.com). The only non-profit in that list is Apache. It's entirely possible that the others pay royalties for the use of a trademarked term. While it's doubtful, it seemed wise to raise the point. M -- You are currently subscribed to [email protected] as: [email protected] To unsubscribe, change settings or access archives, see http://www.ja-sig.org/wiki/display/JSG/cas-dev
