> His other claim was that you needed to get Mono from Novell for it to be
> "safe". He is confused, the Microsoft Community Promise applies equally
> to everyone, not just Novell. This has been explained to him numerous
> times elsewhere, but he continues to twist reality to FUD Mono (hence
> why I pointed out that he was just trolling).

The problem is that the original poster was trying to conflate Microsoft's
Moonlight 1/2 patent promise from 2007 with the status quo of Mono.

Microsoft has made five promises at different times that cover different bits 
of 
technology:

* Original RAND terms for the C# and CLI in 2001
* Moonlight 1/2 "must get from Novell" terms for Moonlight from 2007
* Community Promise for C#/CLI from 2009
* Moonlight 3/4 "applies to everyone, but you need your own MPEG-LA license" 
(fixes #2 problem) from 2009
* Microsoft large swats of MS-PL or Apache code now included with Mono (both 
with patent licenses).

Mono's use is #1, #3 and #5.   

The Moonlight issue was debated heavily in 2007-2009 and Microsoft removed the 
"You must get it from Novell" terms as it covered the MPEG-LA licensed codecs.  
 
It was instead replaced with terms that are identical for Novell and everyone 
else as far as Moonlight is concerned, but does not include codecs for MPEG-LA 
owned technologies.   Everyone that wants to ship the MPEG-LA codecs needs to 
negotiate their own (Microsoft distributes codecs to Novell customers on all 
the 
Moonlight 1 through 4 cases).


_______________________________________________
MeeGo-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.meego.com/listinfo/meego-dev

Reply via email to