* Tim Smith fired off this tart reply:
> On 2007-12-17, Linonut <linonut@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>> Actually, the danger is very real. You have to be vigilant. Icaza may
>>>> be on thin ice, as far as I can tell.
>>
>> Of course, the BSA ain't likely to come bustin' in on you because your
>> using a system infected with mono. (Get it? Get it? Infected with
>> "mono"??? <grin>)
>
> If what you are doing is using Mono to write Linux program, there is no
> more risk than with any other language that was developed at a company
> and then made an ISO standard.
>
> If what you are doing is using the reverse-engineered clones of Windows
> .NET libraries (e.g., WinForms) to make it easier to port Windows code
> to Linux, or port Linux code to Windows, then you might have a small
> worry--about the same level of worry that anyone else using
> reverse-engineered Windows stuff on Linux has.
Indeed.
> So, if you are careful to avoid Samba, WINE, Exchange clients, etc, on
> Linux, out of concern that Microsoft will come after you, then you
> should avoid those Mono libraries--but it will still be fine and safe
> for Linux programs. (And if you are that careful, then you probably
> also should be avoiding MP3, MPEG, etc., as those are owned by entities
> that have went after people infringing their patents, and they have
> patents valid in most first-world countries, whereas Microsoft's patents
> are usualy only in the US).
Thanks for indicating how business oligarchies intend to extract revenue
from GNU/Linux.
Ask not what patented technology resides in Linux. Ask what technology
in Linux /isn't/ patented.
At some point, the end user just has to say, "To hell with it".
Businesses can't get away with that attitude, however. So I say "Render
unto Caesar what is Caesar's."
<grins as he is nailed to the Cross>
--
Oh yeah, something about nuns, too.
|
|
