>>Microsoft has issued a thorough, unrevokable, legally binding Community Promise to not assert patent claims over .NET implementations
I remember when Microsoft claimed to open their Office document formats. I argued then that I didn't know how (legal loophole, impossible to implement, etc) -- but there was a catch. A monopoly company don't want to do that -- "follow the money".
Later, it was found out that the specification was thousands of pages long, etc.
Are there e.g. any creative loopholes in that agreement? How do you know? Has that Promise been analyzed by a good team of lawyers?
Has Mono been checked for other patent troubles? E.g. doesn't Microsoft itself pay licenses to Oracle, because .NET is too similar to the Java environment?
Edit: I do hope I'm wrong, of course. (Fixed a bit of grammar.)
I remember when Microsoft claimed to open their Office document formats. I argued then that I didn't know how (legal loophole, impossible to implement, etc) -- but there was a catch. A monopoly company don't want to do that -- "follow the money".
Later, it was found out that the specification was thousands of pages long, etc.
Are there e.g. any creative loopholes in that agreement? How do you know? Has that Promise been analyzed by a good team of lawyers?
Has Mono been checked for other patent troubles? E.g. doesn't Microsoft itself pay licenses to Oracle, because .NET is too similar to the Java environment?
Edit: I do hope I'm wrong, of course. (Fixed a bit of grammar.)