[Still OT] Fwd: Microsoft Visual Studio .NET License Agreement Discussion (Was Fwd: Re: [ale] [OT] Interesting Take on MS Programming Tools)

Wed Nov 27 00:24:16 EST 2002

This is the message I sent to the MSC IT Department head, since someone 
recommended I send something.  Any comments/critiques are welcome and 
appreciated.

Thanks again,

Jonathan Glass

----- Forwarded message from Jonathan Glass <jonathan.glass at ibb.gatech.edu> ----
-
Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2002 00:21:25 -0500 (EST)
From: Jonathan Glass <jonathan.glass at ibb.gatech.edu>
To: ale at ale.org
Reply-To: Jonathan Glass <jonathan.glass at ibb.gatech.edu>
Subject: Microsoft Visual Studio .NET License Agreement Discussion (Was Fwd: 
Re: [ale] [OT] Interesting Take on MS Programming Tools)
To: elieson at mail.maconstate.edu

Dr. Elieson & Mr. Leonard,

I am an IT professional who works in both worlds (Microsoft and Open Source
Software), and programs in multiple languages. I do tend to lean to the OSS
(Open Source Software) side of the argument for cost, security, and
compatibility reasons, but I'm not a raging fanatic for either camp. I hope
you'll take what I have to say under serious consideration.

In class on Monday (11/24/2002), Mr. Leonard sang a song of high praise for MS
Visual Studio .NET, and was somewhat disparaging of programming in Open
Source/Unix environments.  I'm a little disheartened to see a professor spend
this much time in class (5-10 minutes) touting the wonders of the MS platform.

At the least, equal time should be given to the OSS alternatives to MS Visual
Studio (if any).

On the Visual Studio issue, I wonder if Mr. Leonard has read the EULA for
Visual Studio .NET?  I started a discussion on this, and have forwarded to you
the last and most insightful message from that discussion.  The author has
included the text of the EULA, which in part states:

  (i) your Licensed Product shall not substantially duplicate the
      capabilities of Microsoft Access or, in the reasonable opinion
      of Microsoft, compete with same;

This effectively restricts any of your students from creating any application
that Microsoft deems as being competition to MS Access (Office is mentioned
elsewhere in the EULA).  This is a serious hindrance.  What if a student wants
to write a simplified database application (I've written several web-based apps

to do this)?  They will be required by this EULA to REQUIRE their customer to
purchase a Microsoft Access license along with their product.

This is just another example of Microsoft trying to expand their monopoly
through their restrictive EULAs.  It would greatly benefit the entire MSC IT
student body if this information were more fully disclosed by the faculty, so
that students can research alternatives, rather than be convinced that this is
the only platform to use because the faculty are so pro-Microsoft and anti-OSS.

The pro-Microsoft stance being taken by the faulty is a trend that I've noticed

over the last 4 years.  In almost every class, the professor seems to believe
and espouse that the MS solution to any problem is the best/only solution.  In
several classes the only 'correct' solution to any problems/situations was the
Microsoft solution, even if there was an alternative which was technically
superior and more cost-effective.

I know the IT program started offering a Linux admin course, but I can assure
you it has room to grow.  This is a step in the right direction, but I believe
more needs to be done to make the graduates aware of the alternatives to
Microsoft.  Even if this entails a short "Survey of Operating Systems" style
course which covers the pros and cons, strengths and weaknesses, of a variety
of operating systems.

Thank you for you consideration.

Jonathan Glass
Systems Support Specialist II
Institute for Bioengineering and Bioscience
Georgia Institute of Technology
404.385.0127

----- Forwarded message from aaron <aaron at pd.org> -----
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2002 21:12:53 -0500
From: aaron <aaron at pd.org>
To: ale at ale.org
Reply-To: ale at ale.org
Subject: Re: [ale] [OT] Interesting Take on MS Programming Tools
To: ale at ale.org

On Tuesday 26 November 2002 11:52, Jeff Rose wrote:
> So you are limited as to what you can develop, what platforms you can
> use and the license you use.

Wow. I keep a fairly close eye on the many invasive and user abusive
activities of Micro$haft, but I didn't realize the extremes to which
these criminals are taking their assaults on developers rights!

Thanks for the important warnings about the V$ EULA content and the
attachment of said 'contract with Satan' ;-).

I think you omitted a few points from the mafia 'fogetaboudit' list,
though:
> So long as competition, Linux and the GPL
...and  fair use, free speech, free markets, freedom of choice,
elementary business ethics, freedom to innovate and basic personal
privacy...
> aren't important to you, I'd say VS.Net is the perfect choice.

Most every informed, intelligent fan of computer technology knows to shun
M$ products across the board on the grounds of the source, but it is
extremely helpful to have documentation on hand which so completely
proves the idiocy of dealing with Micro$haft at any level.

I hope that Johathon Glass will forward the EULA and Jeff Rose's notes to
every student at Macon State College. It's infuriating to think that my
tax dollars might be supporting this kind of coercion, bribery and fraud
at a State operated institution of higher learning.

peace
(after justice)
aaron

On Tuesday 26 November 2002 11:52, Jeff Rose wrote:
> Well the Eula specifically states that if you use key components of
> .Net, specifically libraries and the CRT I believe, you may not port
> your program to any non-Windows platform.  No one is going to program in
> VS.Net and not use one of the components.  Thus using VS.Net will lock
> your application into the Windows world.  I think you would be insane
> to develop a program in VS.Net unless you knew in advance that you
> would never want to port it.
>
> directly from the EULA on disc 1 of VS.Net
> "	3.1 Redistributable Code-Standard.
>
> 	(a) If you are authorized and choose to redistribute Sample Code,
> Redistributable Code, VC Redistributables, or Limited Use
> Redistributable Code (collectively, the "Redistributables") as
> described in Section 2, you agree: (i) except as otherwise noted in
> Section 2.1 (Sample Code), to distribute the Redistributables only in
> object code form and in conjunction with and as a part of a software
> application product developed by you that adds significant and primary
> functionality to the Redistributables ("Licensed Product"); (ii) that
> the Redistributables only operate in conjunction with Microsoft Windows
> platforms; (iii) not to use Microsoft's name, logo, or trademarks to
> market the Licensed Product; (iv) to display your own valid copyright
> notice which shall be sufficient to protect Microsoft's copyright in
> the Product; (v) not to remove or obscure any copyright, trademark, or
> patent notices that appear on the Product as delivered to you; (vi) 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; (vii) otherwise
> comply with the terms of this EULA; and (viii) agree that Microsoft
> reserves all rights not expressly granted. "
>
>
> 	If I remember correctly it prohibits you from using VS.Net to make an
> application that directly competes with Access!  What's next Word?
> Excel? SQL Server?  Windows Media Player?
>
> again from the EULA
> 	"(a) "Jet" Files or MSDE. If you redistribute the "Jet Files" (as
> identified in the Product ) or MSDE (individually or collectively, the
> "MS DB Files"), you agree to comply with the following additional
> requirements: (i) your Licensed Product shall not  substantially
> duplicate the capabilities of Microsoft Access or, in the reasonable
> opinion of Microsoft, compete with same; and (ii) unless your Licensed
> Product requires your customers to license Microsoft Access in order to
> operate, you shall not reproduce or use any of the MS DB Files for
> commercial distribution in conjunction with a general-purpose word
> processing, spreadsheet, or database management software product, or an
> integrated work or product suite whose components include a
> general-purpose word processing, spreadsheet, or database management
> software product except for the exclusive use of importing data to the
> various formats supported by Microsoft Access. Note: A product that
> includes limited word processing, spreadsheet, or database components
> along with other components which provide significant and primary
> value, such as an accounting product with limited spreadsheet
> capability, is not considered to be a "general-purpose" product."
>
> sounds like they are protecting Office to me.
>
> 	And of course you may not use GPL, oh excuse me 'Identified Software'.
>
> 	"(b) If you use the Redistributables, or the "Sample Code" or
> "Redistributable Code" portions of the SDK Software (as described in
> Section 4.2(b) (all of the foregoing referred to in this paragraph as
> the "Licensed Software"), then in addition to your compliance with the
> applicable distribution requirements described for the Licensed
> Software, the following also applies. 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 thereof; and (iii) not using Identified Software in the
> development of a derivative work of the Licensed Software.
> "Identified Software" means software which is licensed pursuant to
> terms that directly or indirectly (A) create, or purport to create,
> obligations for Microsoft with respect to the Licensed Software or
> derivative work thereof or (B) grant, or purport to grant, to any third
> party any rights or immunities under Microsoft's intellectual property
> or proprietary rights in the Licensed Software or derivative work
> thereof. 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 (1) disclosed or distributed in
> source code form; (2) be licensed for the purpose of making derivative
> works; or (3) be redistributable at no charge."
>
> So you are limited as to what you can develop, what platforms you can
> use and the license you use.  So long as competition, Linux and the GPL
> aren't important to you, I'd say VS.Net is the perfect choice.
_______________________________________________
Ale mailing list
Ale at ale.org
http://www.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale

----- End forwarded message -----
_______________________________________________
Ale mailing list
Ale at ale.org
http://www.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale