From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.4 required=5.0 tests=AC_FROM_MANY_DOTS,BAYES_00 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,ac39a12d5faf5b14 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-04-23 20:11:25 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!easynet-tele!easynet-melon!easynet.net!psiuk-p2!psiuk-p3!uknet!psiuk-n!news.pace.co.uk!nh.pace.co.uk!not-for-mail From: "Marin David Condic" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Development process in the Ada community Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2002 12:03:43 -0400 Organization: Posted on a server owned by Pace Micro Technology plc Message-ID: References: <5ee5b646.0204200830.2bd258d2@posting.google.com> <5ee5b646.0204201703.48832bd3@posting.google.com> <87vgalbetj.fsf@deneb.enyo.de> <3CC57FEA.8020208@mail.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: dhcp-200-133.miami.pace.co.uk X-Trace: nh.pace.co.uk 1019577824 8100 136.170.200.133 (23 Apr 2002 16:03:44 GMT) X-Complaints-To: newsmaster@news.cam.pace.co.uk NNTP-Posting-Date: 23 Apr 2002 16:03:44 GMT X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:23031 Date: 2002-04-23T16:03:44+00:00 List-Id: Well, that's kind of the point. For one thing, Microsoft isn't likely to want to open itself to liability by using GPL'ed code and then not handing out the source. Better to simply spend a million or so having an in-house team develop their own version that they control. What does it buy them to try to gain leverage with GPL'ed code? For another thing, Microsoft has little to zero incentive to want to expose their code publically. That could only benefit their competitors. So why would they one day have a change of heart and decide to start GPL-ing things? Finally, I doubt very much that the bulk of their customers care if they get the source code or not. Arguing that somehow the customer is going to gain some benefit like protection from Microsoft going out of business (probably not in my lifetime or at least the useful life of the software) or that they can get third-party support (they can get training and help now, but no bug-fix/feature changes - yet still they buy, so why should Microsoft care?) just doesn't seem to carry much weight. Maybe one day Open Source vendors will overtake Microsoft. I just don't see Microsoft giving up and joining the Open Source strategy either by accident or design so long as they are on top. MDC -- Marin David Condic Senior Software Engineer Pace Micro Technology Americas www.pacemicro.com Enabling the digital revolution e-Mail: marin.condic@pacemicro.com "Hyman Rosen" wrote in message news:3CC57FEA.8020208@mail.com... > > If it was discovered that MSO included GPLed code, MS > could choose to honor the GPL and distribute the source, > or they could stop selling the version of the product > which included the GPLed code. This would generally mean > that unsold product (store shelves, or at distributors) > would be recalled, but people who have bought copies > would be permitted to keep them. If the violation is > found to be deliberate, then various civil or criminal > penalties could apply, but it's unlikely that revealing > the MSO sources would be part of the penalty. > > Remember, if someone commits a copyright violation, the > copyright holder does not get to decide what the penalty > should be. >