OSI Approves Microsoft Ms-PL and Ms-RL

Russ Nelson writes "In a board meeting held October 10th and announced today, the Open Source Initiative approved two of Microsoft's software licenses: the Microsoft Reciprocal License and the Microsoft Public License. These licenses are refreshingly short and clean, compared to, say, the GPLv3 and the Sun CDDL. They share a patent peace clause, a no-trademark-license clause, and they differ only in the essential clause of reciprocation. Of course, Microsoft is not widely trusted in the Open Source world, and their motives have been called into question during the approval discussions. How can they be attacking Open Source projects on one hand, and seeking not only to use open source methods, but even to use the OSI Approved Open Source trademark? Nobody knows for sure except Microsoft. But if you are confident that Open Source is the best way to develop software (as we at the Open Source Initiative are), then you can see why Microsoft would both attack Open Source and seek to use it. It is both their enemy and their salvation."

Comments

well, it is how they do things

[User 956]

then you can see why Microsoft would both attack Open Source and seek to use it.

I have two words for you: Embrace and extend.

OSI sez "We were just joking about trimming..."

[Infonaut]

"... the list of OSI-compatible licenses."

Why trim, when you can grow!

XXX approves Microsoft AAA and NNN

[vldmr_krn]

Compare the Slashdot headline to the fark headline:

Microsoft licenses approved as "official" open source by OSI. Overheard from Irony tag: "I see what you did there"

Most slashdot readers have no idea what Ms-PL and Ms-RL are, and a not-insignificant number don't know what OSI is. Wasting readers' time with opaque headlines that cause them to ignore interesting stories is something that should be thought of in terms of not doing it.