On 27 Jun 2001, Oleg Goldshmidt wrote:
>
> Gilad Ben-Yossef <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > I wonder if someone will have the balls to call their bluff and sue
> > them for not realeasing the source code for Windows, IE, etc.. I'm
> > pretty sure there's a line of Perl *somewhere* in their build
> > system... ;-)
>
> You might be interested in reading
>
> http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/4/19953.html
A quote from the article:
If someone within Microsoft or contracted to Microsoft could be
legally deemed to have the authority to accept the provisions of the
GPL while incorporating GPL code into Microsoft software, then
Microsoft would be bound by the GPL. Some punk could force them to GPL
WinXP. It's even conceivable (well, if you think lawyer hard enough)
that some of the many open source sympathising grunts in Redmond could
plant the code deliberately. And you thought we were joking last week
(Commie cell in MS secretly pushing GPL to customers).
The article mentions this asa "microsoft lawyer thinking", but doesn't
bother much with telling that it is totally incorrect (see other posts in
this thread, for instance). Just from reading the article, one might get
the impression that the new license is supposed to plug some holes in the
existing liceneses.
No, I don't think that any microsoft lawyer is such paranoid+illeterate .
--
Tzafrir Cohen
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.technion.ac.il/~tzafrir
=================================================================
To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command
echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
