Microsoft clarifies patent licensing for ECMA 334 and 335

Toshio Kuratomi a.badger at
Tue Jul 7 15:40:40 UTC 2009

On 07/07/2009 02:01 AM, David Nielsen wrote:
>>From our good buddy Miguel over the Novell way:
> Finally we can put an end to all this retarded Boycott Novell anti-mono FUD,
> however to comply properly we on the Fedora side may need to split out the
> WinForms, ADO.NET and ASP.NET, then ship those in rpmfusion instead as they
> are not covered by ECMA and thus not by the the community promise.
> Good news, and thank you to Novell and Microsoft for working this out,
> erasing doubt and showing good faith. I am very happy today.
Q: How is the Community Promise (CP) different from the Open
Specification Promise (OSP)?

A: The CP requires that implementations conform to all of required parts
of the mandatory portions of the specification. Also, in specified cases
(such as where the specifications have uses that exceed those needed to
achieve the interoperability needs for which the release under the CP is
being made), the CP may have special terms concerning what kinds of
implementations are covered.

This looks non-Free Software.  You have permission to modify the code
but only within a limited range of applications.  I think we'll have to
continue to depend on OIN rather than the Community Promise for
protection from patent obligations here.

IANAL and all that.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : 

More information about the mono mailing list