[Am-info] [Fwd: Re: [ale] MS Propaganda representative]

[Geoffrey]

 From another list.  Quoting from the .net EULA.  This is unbelievable...

	One of my favorite parts of the EULA is and I quote.  By agreeing to
the license you agree "to indemnify, hold harmless, and defend Microsoft
from and against any claims or lawsuits, including attorney's fees, that
arise or result from the use or distribution of the Licensed Product;"
So you can't blame MS for any problems arising from .Net even if it can
be shown that it is with their code. And you have to agree to pay for
their defense in the case of a lawsuit?
	Another favorite, "Your license rights to the Licensed Software are
conditioned upon your (i) not incorporating Identified Software into or
combining Identified Software with the Licensed Software or a derivative
work thereof; (ii) not distributing Identified Software in conjunction
with the Licensed Software or a derivative work therof; and (iii) not
using Identified Software in the development of a derivative work of the
Licensed Software."  And you guessed it... "Identified Software
includes, without limitation, any software that requires as a condition
of use, modification, and/or distribution of such software that other
software incorporated into, derived from, or distributed with such
software be (A) disclosed or distributed in source code form; (B) be
licensed for the purpose of making derivative works; or (C) be
redistributable at no charge."  Why didn't they just say "no open
source"?
	My real question is how can the Mono project get around the EULA.  Is
C# not covered by something equally fascist as this crap?


-- 
Until later: Geoffrey		esoteric@3times25.net

I didn't have to buy my radio from a specific company to listen
to FM, why doesn't that apply to the Internet (anymore...)?