DragonFly kernel List (threaded) for 2003-11
Re: SCO after BSD settlement
Gary Thorpe wrote:
So its okay to throw crap at some company because they claim IBM
misused it, but Microsoft can violate licenses and its all okay? Wierd
Sorry, I just have to butt in for a moment. I thought you were wrong in
stating that Microsoft violated the BSD License.
Microsoft do indeed violate the BSD license. I haven't seen a paper
manual for Windows in about 7-8 years. So I thought I'd check in the
closest thing we have to it these days, in XP, Start Menu -> Help &
Support. Go to the search box and type in "copyright" and watch the
references to the EULA pop up. In fact type in "BSD" and it talks about
how nice we are. At no point, anywhere, even on the Microsoft Licensing
website, is there any copy of the BSD License.
I've just done a search of my entire Windows XP hard drive for any files
at all that contain the string 'THIS SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED BY THE
COPYRIGHT HOLDERS AND CONTRIBUTORS "AS IS" AND ANY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED
WARRANTIES' which is the first bit of the last paragraph of every
version I've ever seen of the BSD License.
Something smells here - we know for a fact that at least the IPv6 in
there now and even the TCP/IP stacks in Windows since NT4 were a direct
lift from BSD world... it even confused nmap for a while... so, what gives?
They do actively encourage it's use though:
And of course, Paul Richards has that story about meeting the Microsoft guys working on .NET at BSDcon Europe in 2001 - their development platform of choice apparently was FreeBSD. So, it's not like they don't know who we are or anything...