|
Email Sender ID: Exactly what's wrong with the license? |
|
|
|
Source: newsforge.com - Posted by Vincenzo Ciaglia
|
Larry Rosen, the attorney who has been negotiating with Microsoft on behalf of the OSI for changes to the restrictive patent licensing attached to Sender ID, was asked recently to explain in a . . .
Larry Rosen, the attorney who has been negotiating with Microsoft on behalf of the OSI for changes to the restrictive patent licensing attached to Sender ID, was asked recently to explain in a concise manner exactly what it is about the Microsoft licensing for its proposed standard that makes it unacceptable to the open source/free software worlds. Rosen's reply makes interesting reading for all of us.
The question posed to Rosen in an email:
"For my part, I keep hearing lots of people try to explain why the MS license is unacceptable, but I'm not fully convinced that it's significantly different from the licenses that companies like IBM or Sun use when they contribute to open source. And some of it (e.g. the Apache position statement) doesn't even seem to refer to the current version of the license, but rather to an earlier draft. Maybe I'm just being dense, but can anyone explain, in 100 words or less, what's wrong with the MS license? (It isn't that I'm unwilling to read more than 100 words, just that I think an effort at concise precision is rather badly needed.)"
Rosen's reply:
Read this full article at newsforge.com
Only registered users can write comments.
Please login or register. Powered by AkoComment! |
