Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Opening Office XML Formats
sriram_2001 writes "Microsoft has opened up the XML schemas for Office 2003, thereby silencing a lot of criticism. This could potentially open the way for several government contracts as certain governments have made open standards (and not open-source) a pre-requisite.
In their FAQ, Microsoft not only says that open source developers can distribute software built using them, but also that they'll make all future updates available using the same terms.
Here is the Official Microsoft Site and CRN
and Techworld have stories about it."
According to their FAQ:
While it may not be legally binding, I'd say it's enough permisssion for the layman, and I think it could be argued in court (of course, you could also just read their license which may say the same thing. But I don't speak ligalese myself).
Tried to download this thing to see if it had acceptable (re)distribution terms for inclusion in GPL-compatible programs like AbiWord, KOffice or OpenOffice.org. But all I could find was some xsdref.msi file.
How does one open/extract such a thing? Does anybody has the distribution terms as clean/clear text file?
The Future Is Open: What OpenDocument Is And Why You Should Care ~ by Daniel Carrera
Permission to copy, display and distribute this document is available at: http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/en-us/odcXMLRef/ html/odcXMLRefLegalNotice.asp
couldn't people then just write a non-GPL ms-XML plugin for a GPL package, which is downloaded seperate in order to circumvent incompatibility with the GPL?
That depends, but probably not easily.
Let's take a closer look. On the legal notice page, we see that "The following license applies to the schema files ... and must be included in any copies that are made of the schema files ..." Thus, if you include one of their XSDs (schema files) in order to parse an Office document, then "No right to create modifications or derivatives of this Specification is granted herein."
That pretty much precludes even a BSD license. The "openness" of these schemas includes the ability to use it as Microsoft has defined them, not the ability to modify it as you see fit.
J'aime mieux les méchants que les imbéciles, parce qu'ils se reposent. -- Alexandre Dumas
Donate free food here
Or, put this way, the moment OpenOffice or StarOffice implements these schemas, Microsoft can plunder their source code, and the only way OO or Sun can fight it is to lose the compatibility that would make them competitive.
I thought you said you could read legalese. It says, in the text you quoted yourself, that Microsoft can cancel your license to the schemas if you sue Microsoft for patent infringement in relation to their use of their own schemas. Source code is generally not protected by patents, but by copyright. So your take on this is faulty at best.
"Oppression and harassment is a small price to pay to live in the land of the free." -- Montgomery Burns.
Related patents seem to be included in the license. Here's a quote from the FAQ:
That's only the license for the specifications; here the license for actually using the specifications to write software.
(from http://www.microsoft.com/mscorp/ip/format/xmlpaten tlicense.asp)
Office 2003 XML Reference Schema Patent License
Published: December 3, 2003 | Updated: January 27, 2005
This document is intended to expand upon the rights that Microsoft grants to certain Microsoft® Office 2003 XML schemas. As described in this document, the technical specifications for the schemas include rights under copyright to make reproductions and to display and distribute those reproductions, subject to certain terms and conditions. The purpose of this document is to provide a patent license to individuals and organizations interested in implementing software programs that can read and write files that conform to such specifications.
Please read this entire document carefully to understand your rights.
Office Schemas
Microsoft Office 2003 includes support for certain XML "schemas" known as Wordprocessing ML, Spreadsheet ML, and FormTemplate Schemas. For purposes of this document, these schemas will be referred to as the "Office Schemas." In general terms, schemas are document structures used for presentation and layout of XML data.
Copies of the technical specifications for the Office Schemas, which include an associated copyright notice and license, can be found at http://msdn.microsoft.com/office/understanding/xml office/default.aspx.
Patent License
Microsoft may have patents and/or patent applications that are necessary for you to license in order to make, sell, or distribute software programs that read or write files that comply with the Microsoft specifications for the Office Schemas.
Except as provided below, Microsoft hereby grants you a royalty-free license under Microsoft's Necessary Claims to make, use, sell, offer to sell, import, and otherwise distribute Licensed Implementations solely for the purpose of reading and writing files that comply with the Microsoft specifications for the Office Schemas. A "Licensed Implementation" means only those specific portions of a software product that read and write files that are fully compliant with the specifications for the Office Schemas. The term "Necessary Claims" means claims of a patent or patent application (including continuations, continuations-in-part, or reissues) that are owned or controlled by Microsoft and that are necessarily infringed by reading or writing files pursuant to the requirements of the Office Schemas. A claim is necessarily infringed only when it is not possible to avoid infringing when conforming to the specification. Notwithstanding the foregoing, "Necessary Claims" do not include any claims: (i) that would require a payment of royalties by Microsoft to unaffiliated third parties; (ii) covering any Enabling Technologies that may be necessary to make or use any product incorporating a Licensed Implementation, or (iii) covering the reading or writing of files other than those complying with the requirements of the specifications for the Office Schemas. "Enabling Technologies" means technologies that may be necessary to make or use any product or portion of a product that complies with the Microsoft specifications for the Office Schemas, but are not expressly set forth or required in those specifications, such as general word processing, spreadsheet or presentation features or functionality, operating system technology, programming interfaces, protocols, and the like.
If you distribute, license or sell a Licensed Implementation, this license is conditioned upon you requiring that the following notice be prominently displayed in all copies and derivative works of your source code and in copies of the documentation and licenses associated with your Licensed Implementation:
"This product may incorporate intellectual property owned by Microsoft
Be a PATRIOT--because the only thing we have to fear is the lack thereof.
FUD. It sometimes helps to read the linked pages.
Q. The patent license associated with the Office 2003 XML Reference Schemas states that "Microsoft may have patents and/or patent applications that are necessary for you to license in order to make, sell, or distribute software programs that read or write files that comply with the Microsoft specifications for the Office Schemas." What does this statement mean and to what specific patents and/or patent applications does this statement relate?
A. As an industry leader in the design and development of innovative computer technology, Microsoft has made a significant investment in research and development (R&D). With an annual budget of nearly $7 billion, Microsoft's R&D commitment is among the highest of the world's major technology providers, both on an absolute basis and as a percentage of sales. Like other major technology providers, Microsoft routinely applies to governments around the world to obtain patents on our inventions. A patent establishes ownership of an invention, enabling the patent owner to benefit commercially from investments in innovation. A patent is granted if government patent examiners conclude that an invention is a true innovation compared with existing technology. Microsoft has been awarded thousands of United States patents, and our worldwide portfolio continues to grow.
Under the patent license for the Office 2003 XML Reference Schemas, Microsoft offers royalty-free rights both to its issued patents and patents that may be issued in the future as an outcome of the patent process. To learn more about Microsoft's intellectual property policy and to find links to government patent offices, we encourage you to learn more about Microsoft Intellectual Property at the Microsoft Web site.
We have chosen a simple and straightforward licensing approach that should appeal to a wide variety of potential licensees because it broadly covers all applicable patents and patent applications instead of only those that are enumerated.
Banu
certain technology using code is patented - so if Microsoft steals that technology from your word processor (say, if you've got some brand new way of parsing files, to take a fairly lame example), they're forbidding you to sue them unless you want to lose your compatibility.
:)
No, you are reading it wrong. If Microsoft "steals" your patented parsing technology, and you whip up a patent covering Microsoft's XML schemas and sue them over those schemas, THEN Microsoft cancels your schema license. If you sue them for something else, then the schema license isn't affected at all. Go and read what you quoted again, I am sure you'll agree
For the record, many recent open source licenses from both IBM and SUN has this exact same term ("use our tech, except if you sue us over them using patents"). GNU is considering this kind of protection too, in the next version of the GPL.
"Oppression and harassment is a small price to pay to live in the land of the free." -- Montgomery Burns.
There is no EULA prompt when you use the installer. If you don't have Windows, you can download the zip file.from my site.
They stopped distributing the fonts. You can still download them legally, if you know where to look, just not from microsoft.com. The license is in effect.
Depends on whether they have included an additional definition of 'program' or not. In all EU jurisdictions there is a legal definition of a 'computer program' that does include README files and such distributed with the code (executable or source). Having a more restrictive definition would open up a whole can of worms in those jurisdictions.
And yes, I do have a law degree and am specialised in IT-law
-- Spelling and grammar errors tend to be a sign of erroneous thinking.
In the letter to the European Union's Interchange of Data between Administration (IDA) commission, there are these lines:
The technical documentation is available on the Internet for anyone to copy and read
The schemas are based on the W3C standard for XML
The license is royalty-free
The license is perpetual
The license is very brief and available to anyone
I believe that covers your questions about "worldwide" and "perpetual".
However, the license itself plainly states you are not allowed to sub-license. The only case for revocability stated is: "Microsoft reserves the right to terminate this license grant if you sue Microsoft or any of Microsoft's affiliates for patent infringement over claims relating to reading or writing of files that comply with the Office Schemas. This license is perpetual subject to this reservation."
However, it does seem quite broad:
"Microsoft hereby grants you a royalty-free license under Microsoft's Necessary Claims to make, use, sell, offer to sell, import, and otherwise distribute Licensed Implementations solely for the purpose of reading and writing files that comply with the Microsoft specifications for the Office Schemas."
I can see an LGPL library for handling MS-OFFICE formats. Also, remember the GPL addresses copyrights and NOT patents, which this license covers. You right your own code, it is your copyright, not Microsoft's.
-Charles (IANAL)
Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
Is that letter to an EU committee legally binding?
Most probably. Look up the term "promissory estoppel". If MS turned around on this letter, they would get roasted by this common law concept.
Of course, IANAL.
Licence is written in xsd documents:
/ html/odcXMLRefLegalNotice.asp?frame=true.n tlicense.asp.
Permission to copy, display and distribute the contents of this document (the "Specification"), in any medium for any purpose without fee or royalty is hereby granted, provided that you include the following notice on ALL copies of the Specification, or portions thereof, that you make:
Copyright (c) Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved. Permission to copy, display and distribute this document is available at: http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/en-us/odcXMLRef
No right to create modifications or derivatives of this Specification is granted herein.
There is a separate patent license available to parties interested in implementing software programs that can read and write files that conform to the Specification. This patent license is available at this location: http://www.microsoft.com/mscorp/ip/format/xmlpate
THE SPECIFICATION IS PROVIDED "AS IS" AND MICROSOFT MAKES NO REPRESENTATIONS OR WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, NON-INFRINGEMENT, OR TITLE; THAT THE CONTENTS OF THE SPECIFICATION ARE SUITABLE FOR ANY PURPOSE; NOR THAT THE IMPLEMENTATION OF SUCH CONTENTS WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY THIRD PARTY PATENTS, COPYRIGHTS, TRADEMARKS OR OTHER RIGHTS.
MICROSOFT WILL NOT BE LIABLE FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES ARISING OUT OF OR RELATING TO ANY USE OR DISTRIBUTION OF THE SPECIFICATION.
The name and trademarks of Microsoft may NOT be used in any manner, including advertising or publicity pertaining to the Specification or its contents without specific, written prior permission. Title to copyright in the Specification will at all times remain with Microsoft. No other rights are granted by implication, estoppel or otherwise.
I think the last one is intresting. Even if OpenOffice.org makes their office suit completly Microsoft compilant, they not allowed to mention it!