Microsoft/Novell Deal & Mono

I've read several documents know to try and figure out where Mono stands in the MS/Novell deal. There are those, which include the Mono team, that point out that Mono contains no patents and is not affected by the deal. Others, which includes lawyers, point that Mono is covered in the deal. This makes no sense. Where is Mono with the deal - in or out?

Where is Second Life in this if Mono is in included in the deal? Will Microsoft try to pull the plug on SL?

The most technical aspect I have seen, but still have yet to have a strong confirmation, is that as long as you use Mono outside of any Novell/SUSE product than it is patent free. Anotherwords, if you use Mono on Novell/SUSE and compile your programs and distribute that code, you may be binded under the deal. That is because the compilation itself may rely on libraries that are covered by the deal - not Mono core itself.

Further, that would mean if SL uses Mono with Novell/SUSE products, all of the programs written under Second Life may be affected. This, of course, is the worst case. I highly doubt it would even envolve that far.

With the deal, Novell pays Microsoft for patent protection. This essentially creates the Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt (FUD) that anything contributed by Novell is included in the deal. Mono's main sponsor is Novell.

If SL servers don't use anything else related to Novell, it is a far cry for the deal to even affect this world.

I'm sure this will inspire people to write VMs that will run the ECMA language that will have no Novell/Microsoft deal involvement.

What can anybody else confirm?

And the politics of Mono apply to SL how exactly? Yes i know that LL is planning to use Mono for the script engine; but the politics of Mono has nothing to do with that.

The people you should be asking are the Mono crew. They would know best about their IP (intelectual property); not some third party like LL.

Here is the answer from the lead designer, Miguel de Icaza: "I do not know of any patents which Mono infringes."

Hopefully, we can say that means there isn't any. However, why would Novell say Mono is included in the deal? I want to know if Novell really said that.

I found a bunch of different articles under a google for "microsoft novell mono deal."

On the whole, this is a very strange deal:

basically, Microsoft and Novell have made a deal to give each other rights to use the patents for things that will allow Linux and Windows to talk to each other. Presumably, this would include the SMB protocol, FAT, and some other similar things. (Did you know that you have to pay a license fee if you want to build a device that uses FAT?)

Here's the problem with such an approach: the GPL is reciprocal: when you make a change to a GPL product, you are bound to release those changes for everyone to use for any reason. Along with it, you automatically release the patent rights.

Maybe I'm looking at it wrong, but it seems that this aspect of the GPL makes it imossible for Microsoft to enforce any of those patents against anyone, commercial developer or not.

Some more reading up on the deal is definitely in order. I doubt that this will infringe on MONO in any way After all, MS didn't invent the virtual Machine. .Net is based on the same concepts as Java, which was developed by Sun Microsystems. Sun forced MS to discontinue their own Java VM when MS did the same thing they did with everything else: they made their own Java VM "just different enough" that programs written to work on the MS VM didn't work with Sun's VM.

So my guess is that, like what they've done with IE, attempted to do with Java, and have successfully done in ohter areas, Microsoft intends to make Novell's Linux just incompatible enough that people will be forced to choose, and will probably choose Novell's Linux. Then, at some point, they'll find a way to do an end-run around the GPL.

We'll see how this plays out. Win or lose, this will be interesting.

It depends if they upgrade the license to GPL 3. GPL 3 has some new stuff to keep people from trying to sidestep it. The '5th International GPLv3 Conference' is next week, best to wait to see what happens then.

You may be on to something there, Dr Tardis. To make it just a bit different does seem like their plan. Microsoft is in a position to lose, and they obviously are in a position to try what it takes to hold on to what they have.

One thing that Microsoft has feared is a headless Windows. They want to protect the driver environment they have built up over the years. The main reason why Microsoft stays ahead is due to companies that contract with Microsoft to only build drivers for Microsoft products. If someone comes and and takes out the Windows GUI and say replaces it with GNOME desktop, people just might start to buy Linux instead of Microsoft. They'll see that Linux runs GNOME also. Vista tries to prevent that with a strict system to only allow signed drivers in the system. You can't even use a normal Vista installation to test your newly designed drivers on unless Microsoft signs off on the driver first. This prevents anybody being able to make a driver that installs into Vista and would render it headless.

Microsoft obvious move on this is to assimulate Novell/SUSE and offer that as Linux on a headless Vista. This is very much possible. With this setup, Microsoft would be able to offer Linux with access to the Microsoft's driver foundation.

Microsoft will lose on this bit because of newer hardware that can virtualize the OS environment, for example VMX. It is the same reason why many companies have pulled out of virtualization at the software level.

I'm sure we will see some battles yet to come as Microsoft fights to clearly define what is Microsoft's patents under Linux. We know there is patents under the .NET framework, for example Passport. We need to see exactly what the deal includes so there is no surprise in the future.

I'm sure many would not want to run a business on Second Life and by surprise would have to stop their business because patent infringements cause a "cease and desist" on your business. Mono team may be able to work around a patent infringement - but how much time will that take from the time the C&D letter goes out until there is a patch made. With Novell's "no sue" payments backs to Microsoft, it gives the illusion that there is something to worry about. This is why we need more details.