Re: [DotGNU]Propoganda starts at home...

[Bradley M. Kuhn]

> David Sugar wrote:
> >
> > I suspect one reason they choose to come up with that horrible "shared 
> > source"
> > license was because they had code that could not be hidden in a true binary
> > (CLR stuff) and so found it nessisary to have some license to cover "visible
> > code" and later convenient to use it as a marketing tool.  The effect of 
> > this
> > system and .net software in easily decodable binaries could be very 
> > corrosive.

Barry Fitzgerald <address@hidden> wrote:

> I know that we don't want the legal battle, but do you think that we can
> even avoid one?

Speculating one way or the other about a possible legal battle probably
isn't worth doing---if it happens, it will happen, and we can't change it.

However, we have very firm legal ground to stand on if we don't ever touch
a piece of Microsoft software while we develop DotGNU.  So, we might as
well take that strategy, and let Microsoft do what they may.


   -- bkuhn

pgpVcvPcsNwUj.pgp
Description: PGP signature