Yeah, yeah, I know it's a very appropriate place to sit on windows and ms, but hey - at least they took critique and made something to improve their bullshit os. Whenever I'll need to deal with it for a second, it won't be as painful as it used to be.
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Microsoft To Make Windows Terminal The Default Choice On Windows 11
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by partcyborg View Post
This is not even remotely how software licenses work.
CLAs have absolutely nothing to do with the software license.
Please don't make things up.
- Likes 3
Comment
-
Originally posted by partcyborg View Post
This is not even remotely how software licenses work.
CLAs have absolutely nothing to do with the software license.
Please don't make things up.- Licenses.
- Copyright License. You grant Microsoft, and those who receive the Submission directly or indirectly from Microsoft, a perpetual, worldwide, non-exclusive, royalty-free, irrevocable license in the Submission to reproduce, prepare derivative works of, publicly display, publicly perform, and distribute the Submission and such derivative works, and to sublicense any or all of the foregoing rights to third parties.
- Patent License. You grant Microsoft, and those who receive the Submission directly or indirectly from Microsoft, a perpetual, worldwide, non-exclusive, royalty-free, irrevocable license under Your patent claims that are necessarily infringed by the Submission or the combination of the Submission with the Project to which it was Submitted to make, have made, use, offer to sell, sell and import or otherwise dispose of the Submission alone or with the Project.
- Likes 7
Comment
-
-
Does CLA have any real effect when the software is already MIT licensed? All I can think of is using it to prevent major contributions from having their own license headers or changing their license headers in the future.
Any license change from Microsoft could be met with a simple fork of latest MIT code.
CLA is much more effective when paired with GPL and other more restrictive licenses as it allows relicensing to accommodate special needs. MIT code you can take and include with whatever other licenses anyways.
EDIT oh right its about patent protection. Seems very reasonable from MS covering their ass in that regard so that nobody tries to sneak in their patented technology just to sue MS down the line.
- Likes 2
Comment
-
Originally posted by OmniNegro View PostToo little, far too late.
MS could have done this a decade ago, but they never believed the terminal mattered to end users. So be it.
We on Linux have had all the advances they refused to even consider for a very long time.
Mark my words, they are going to let us Linux users fix up their terminal for them, and then they will endlessly pretend they did it themselves and probably whine that they own the stuff we contribute to their closed source abomination.
Still, they are using Github at least. About time they took an interest.
And for tech geeks? They've used Putty + screen/tmux for two decades now. No one has complained too much.
- Likes 2
Comment
-
Originally posted by Inopia View PostDoes CLA have any real effect when the software is already MIT licensed? All I can think of is using it to prevent major contributions from having their own license headers or changing their license headers in the future.
Any license change from Microsoft could be met with a simple fork of latest MIT code.
If they close the source, the Open Source fork is very likely to lag behind and slowly die unless another organization funds the effort on par with Microsoft (this example also shows why Open Source is economically more efficient and avoids double-spend).
However, that's unlikely to happen because Microsoft profits from community engagement and contributions, which is the reason they keep things Open Source in the first place. The community also profits from Microsoft's work on the software and from the ability to use it, examine it, and modify it freely.
Without the CLA, they simply don't fully own the code and have to ask anyone even with minor contributions for permission to relicense the code, which might obviously be an issue for them if they want to use the software as a strategic part of a large range of proprietary products. Patents are just a part of the issue.Last edited by wagaf; 15 December 2021, 06:50 AM.
Comment
Comment