SFLC Says Microsoft Violated the GPL 237
After Microsoft donated driver code to the Linux kernel under the GPLv2, stories surfaced that they had done so under duress of already being in violation of the GPL. Microsoft quickly denied that any GPL violation was a driver for their decision to donate the code; the company's senior director of platform strategy, Sam Ramji, said at the time: "Microsoft's decision was not based on any perceived obligations tied to the GPLv2 license." Now the Software Freedom Law Center confirms that Microsoft was indeed in violation of the GPLv2 when it distributed its Hyper-V Linux Integration Components without providing source code. Community members led by Greg Kroah-Hartman contacted the company and coached them through the process of getting compliant. Microsoft now says that they had already been on the path for several months toward releasing the software under GPLv2 before Kroah-Hartman got in touch.
crow (Score:1, Funny)
it's what's for dinner!
Re:Old news? (Score:2, Funny)
Come on, there's always time for anti-microsoft stories.
GPL2 (Score:4, Funny)
Microsoft now says that they had already been on the path for several months toward releasing the software under GPLv2 before Kroah-Hartman got in touch.
Yeah, right.
Re:Blatant lies (Score:3, Funny)
I believe you meant to say "getting all Symantec". It's much funnier that way, and takes advantage of your partial spelling of 'semantic'.
Re:Will there be any action against Microsoft? (Score:2, Funny)
Why aren't they being sued for $150,000 per violation?
Gentlemen, start your FTP clients!
Isn't it amazing? (Score:2, Funny)
Bunch of freakin' whiners.
Re:does it matter? (Score:3, Funny)