Max TenEyck Woodbury max at
Fri Jun 1 00:28:44 CDT 2012

On 06/01/2012 12:40 AM, Conan Kudo (ニール・ゴンパ) wrote:

> You realize that Microsoft has a legally binding irrevocable agreement 
> to not assert patents on .NET implementations that comply with the 
> standard, right? Mono falls under that. I wouldn't worry about patents 
> when it comes to Mono. We're more likely to have problems on the Java 
> side of things than with Mono.

No, I do NOT 'realize' Microsoft has a legally binding irrevocable
agreement ....

I have heard that such a thing exists, but with the recent debacle by
Oracle and
tSCOg's treatment of 'irrevocable agreement"s, I do NOT trust them to
not find a
way to get around such a pronouncement.  In fact I expect that they
could simply
ignore any such promise if they found it convenient to do so and that
they will do so
eventually.  Further, there are enough weasel words in that
pronouncement that I
think they plan to get nasty anyway.

I realize ANYBODY can sue ANYBODY, but I prefer to stay clear of tar
pits like
MONO when I can.

(There is also an indication that .NET is a dead letter and MONO will

More information about the wine-devel mailing list