Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Makes Second GPLv2 Release
angry tapir writes "Microsoft has made its second release under the General Public License in two days with software for Moodle, an 'open-source course management system that teachers use to create online learning Web sites for their classes[, which] has about 30 million users in 207 countries.' It comes on the heels of Redmond contributing drivers to the Linux community. No reports as yet on dropping temperatures in hell."
Someone should really check out the source, just to be sure it doesn't contain hidden subliminal "You Love Microsoft" messages. A good way to brainwash people is to interfere with their education...
1) Release code under GPL
2) Pigs fly and spread pig flue
3) ?????
4) Plague!
5) Robo-ballmer rules the world
People replying to my sig annoy me. That's why I change it all the time.
Coming from an era when even education versions of Microsoft's software would cost a bit of scratch, I can only applaud this move. Course/Project Management software needs to be flexible and accessible. I believe this meets both criteria.
Where genius and insanity become confused true wisdom is found
This is an moodle plugin for microsoft's own groupware. Like their previous driver offering, it's not a wholehearted contribution to making an open source project better, but instead just a thing to make microsoft's own services work better when people need to use open source.
It's good to see a willingness to do even this much, but hardly a staggering change of heart. They've a long way to go yet.
Not everyone was fooled. Apenwarr wrote about it, for one.
This is still Microsoft, folks. It's always a trap.
you had me at #!
and give them something back. What about a binary driver for their FAT filesystem?
I don't know... It looks like its going to drop a few degrees overnight. http://www.weathercity.com/us/mi/hell/
If they were to do something like.... release DirectX 12 and have it open platform, for Linux users and Mac users, then.... maybe..... the community might cut them some slack.
AS far as I'm aware, the only thing they have for Moodle is a Windows Live Plugin, that lets you do Windows Live Searches and have some sort of MSN Messnger functionality.
This isn't Microsoft caring about GPL or whatever, it's about a small project that gives them more hooks into more websites. It gives people learning to use the web in a formal environment MORE Microsoft.
It pays to be obvious, especially if you have a reputation for being subtle.
Moodle is GPLv2, so the plugin must be GPLv2 also or it won't be compatible with the existing software.
Ita erat quando hic adveni.
Obviously this is to help locking the users since early on to MS services. Not evil in itself (and I suppose that either google has the same thing or is thinking in doing the same). But it mostly benefits MS, not Moodle.
Ballmer eats fluffy bunny rabits
AFAIK he doesn't, I do. I love rabbit, especially fried. Frodo and Samwise eat fluffy bunny rabbits, too.
Ballmer shoots puppies.
Free Martian Whores!
Whoa did you see that? It looked like a hog that had taken flight!
Maybe it was just Homer Simpson's pig roast gone awry again.
Shameless plug alert: Game server control panel
Hmm, this is interesting. The more cynical part of me wonders why, and can't help but recall the protections against patent litigation built into GPLv3, and notably missing from GPLv2...
What's interesting about it? The Linux kernel is GPLv2 so a GPLv3 driver is unlikely to make it in. Moodle is also GPLv2 so it's perfectly logical that they'd release their plugin that works with it under the same license. Did you forget that whole big thing about GPLv3 being incompatible with GPLv2? In fact, it would be stupid on their part to release source code to work with programs under incompatible license terms which would disallow anyone from legitimately being able to distribute it.
And, if they are changing, it takes a long time to reverse a reputation as bad as the one they have.
MS have a long and distinguished history of fucking people over. It will take a long time of them specifically not fucking people over for people to stop expecting anything MS announce to have ulterior motives. In much the same way as those people suspicious of MS cannot expect a turnaround in the attitude of the company overnight, you cannot realistically expect an overnight turnaround in the way Microsoft is perceived. I'm no MS hater. I know they've done a pretty big bunch of good things, and, as a Linux user I'm relishing (and, admittedly slightly worried by) the substantial increase in quality from them recently. IE and Office are two bits of MS software that have come on leaps and bounds in the past few years. But I still viewed everything they release with some suspicion because for so many years that has been the most appropriate thing to do. And for several years into the future, the MS I know is going to be the one that one should be suspicious of. Maybe they are changing, but they'll have to change dramatically and far to realistically win people over into thinking they're working for the good of anyone but themselves.
They are not completely missing from GPLv2
from http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-2.0.html, clause 7
"For example, if a patent license would not permit royalty-free redistribution of the Program by all those who receive copies directly or indirectly through you, then the only way you could satisfy both it and this License would be to refrain entirely from distribution of the Program."
http://www.dieblinkenlights.com
Microsoft release of 2 GPL software denotes a completely change of strategy. They started with the Anti-American, and Communist comparison campaign, and now they are changing the curse of their actions. Open-source advocates have many reasons to be suspicions about Microsoft actions since a radical change of position about such a deeply touchy issue, is something that probably has some other hidden interests and secret strategy.
While we could take from this 2 specific examples many obvious elations like serving their own interests in making their software more friendly to multiplatform users(in the case of the drivers), or some other obvious conclusion about how much money Microsoft will make with Moodle open-sourced, I think there's "more, to it than meets the eye."
Let us not forget that the GPL was not yet truly tested in any court of any country, and that the final battle is yet to come.
...
In much the same way as those people suspicious of MS cannot expect a turnaround in the attitude of the company overnight, you cannot realistically expect an overnight turnaround in the way Microsoft is perceived...
But it's been TWO nights!
Interesting.
If you modify their code and try to distribute it you will be forced to release the source--and they will take it back! :D
Tsunami -- You can't bring a good wave down!
What a shocker, Microsoft releases something using that dangerous viral license GPL. Well at least, dangerous and viral according to Microsoft.
80 CC D8 AF AE D3 AB 54 B7 2E CE 67 C7
I think this is part of a larger strategy to point people to thier Azure "Cloud" platform.
Microsoft will probably "open source" more of thier software if it serves the purpose of exposing Microsoft to more people.
If you expect them to one day open source any of thier major technologies (e.g. DirectX, Windows or SQL Server) you will be waiting a loooonnnng time before this will happen.
They will probably open source enough of the "connectivity" type of software to provide a "path of least resistance" to interoperate *into* the Azure platform.
Of course the Azure platform is *not* open source which means you will be *locked-into* thier technology. So sure, you may have open source client code at your disposal but it eventually will lead into a locked platform.
As a company they want to grow beyond "PC on every desk, Windows on every PC, on every phone, console, toaster, gerbil" - that's too limiting now, they want to be the central hub of the Internet and fully exploit "the cloud".
As a bonus everyone moves to a rental model (like the mainframes of years ago) - you don't own anything, you are bound by *thier* "terms and conditions" and you perpetually keep paying for stuff.
This is a corporation's wet dream.
In this case "It's a Trap" may be justified.
Or I am just paranoid and drink waaaayyy too much coffee.
> it is possible that Microsoft might be changing
I like to give people (or companies) a chance to change. But I do require that they first undo their previous crimes. Microsoft can start by identifying the 235 patents they talked about few years ago:
http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/05/14/0018242
Funny thing bout that, Microsoft partially OWNS Blackboard...
My Babylon
What a shocker, Microsoft releases something using that dangerous viral license GPL. Well at least, dangerous and viral according to Microsoft.
[ a bit of reading on the topic for those who think GPL is viral ]
Reply to That ||
There have been times in my life when I would not have thought that someone who calls himself "fuzzy fuzzy fungus" could educate me.
But you did it this time.
for doing it right and not using GPLv3 just because it's newer! It is useless to have open source software available for your use if its license is fundamentally incompatible with your business. Of course, it would be even nicer if they released software under an even freer license i.e. BSD or similar, but I think the only thing preventing that is those licenses not having the buzzwordiness of GPL.
Brian Fundakowski Feldman
Given the trend towards open source software, Microsoft really has to come on board to remain competitive. Unfortunately, M$ is slowly losing its own Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt campaign and must ultimately concede that free/open source software is not "un-American." Actually, free/open source software is very much American as it is open and returns control back to the individual. If America was founded on individualism, then free/open source software should epitomise "Americanness" I also don't doubt that it is part of much larger strategy on Microsoft's part but Microsoft has lost a good bit of its dictatorial powers. I still don't see cloud computing as really catching on in the mainstream just yet. Cloud computing is just really a fancy term for a complete 180 degree turn to an era when computing was centralized and people interfaced with the computer via a terminal. Signs of this are already happening for consumers but the business world would be relatively unwilling to give control over its most important and precious applications.
Somebody stop them!
That is not GPL then. GPL does not put additional requirements on the type of business usage the license is being used for.
Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
Heh... They'll buy a winter coat for him, but there'll be as many strings attached to it as there are to these two GPL releases. Patents still apply and you might get lucky and have the Judge apply in re Bilski to the decision and get you out, you might not- at the least you'll spend quite a bit of money if they choose to sue you over anything patented.
I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
GPL - Because my freedom is not negotiable.
And yet, somehow, you haven't actually read the license you feel the need to advertise in your sig, or you would know that your entire comment is nonsense.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
And yet, that's exactly what Microsoft did. Moodle is switching to GPLv3, and Microsoft's plugin is GPLv2 only.
To get something done, a committee should consist of no more than three persons, two of them absent.
Judging someone on his actions always means to include past actions in your judgement. If someone has a track record of being a child molester, and now opens a school, you wouldn't give your children there, just on the basis that during the last few days he didn't molest any childs, and after all, giving children an education is a good thing.
The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
This is exactly not what I said.
Did you forget that whole big thing about GPLv3 being incompatible with GPLv2? In fact, it would be stupid on their part to release source code to work with programs under incompatible license terms which would disallow anyone from legitimately being able to distribute it.
Except that's not how Moodle is licensed:
I'm not aware of any legal theory that makes distributing GPLv3 software with GPLv2+ software problematic.
Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
It's not about good or bad intentions, so please stop trying to interpret it in that context.
Then outlaw corporations from doing things like public service announcements. I believe the last one I saw ended the announcement with "CBS Cares". Everything you said means nothing until then.
It's hard for people to judge things straight with propaganda like that.
Once you start despising the jerks, you become one.
This is a good thing, but I do have some concerns. I'm a moodle admin at my college's online learning program. We've been using moodle for a year and a half now. Our IT dept. (separate from us) eats everything Microsoft, and went to Live Mail last year for our mail solution. This will enable us to at least avoid having to have two separate sites for the LMS & email. Maybe it will also pave the way for integrating Microsoft live apps (Word, excel, ppt online) in the courses, and hopefully serve as a file repository for students. Not wild about having it use Bing for search, and also the http://my.liveatedu.com/ site doesn't even load in Safari on Windows Vista! That gives me a little pause, will these apps that are linked to run in Firefox or on the Mac or Linux? Guess I'll have to install it on our test server and check into it.
Taking guns away from the 99% gives the 1% 100% of the power.
The only reason microsoft made the last two contributions is because the products are popular and they did not have a presence. For them to stay "required" they have to participate. Those areas are Open Source so the contributions have to be open too. If there are no applications for Moodle that rely on windows, microsoft could loose it's "it requires windows" desktop status in the schools. Schools are the last place Microsoft would like to find themselves unneeded.
Having to work for a living is the root of all evil.
Okay, well I didn't see that it was GPLv2 with "any later version" on it. So in this one case, I guess they could have used GPLv3 but they probably just copied the terms that the Linux kernel uses which is just GPLv2 only and is going to apply that to everything they release GPL. I'd say that's a much more likely answer than some phantom patent lawsuit over some PHP code.
What threat? If microsoft was ever scared by linux, it happened some 10 years ago. Really, wake up people... Microsoft runs a company, structered and organized. They may be screw-ups when it comes to innovation, but they got their shit wrapped up pretty damn well. Linux is only the underdog we all learned to love.
What's the problem with that? There is no rule that says you can't USE GPL 2 and 3 together you just can't DISTRIBUTE them together in the same package. Since this is a plugin and not some vital component there are no issues.
Yes, well, the problem is that there are people who would want to distribute Moodle along with a set of plugins. Aside from the fact that this plugin can never, say, make it into any Linux distribution, there are many companies that do Moodle support, installation, etc. The licensing issue would make this a non-starter for them. So yes, it is an issue.
To get something done, a committee should consist of no more than three persons, two of them absent.
Why exactly would that be? Installing GPL 2 and 3 software together doesn't break the license. Any company is free to install and support both programs just fine.
No, because if you are installing on a customer's computer, you are distributing, and so you would be breaking the license.
To get something done, a committee should consist of no more than three persons, two of them absent.
That is not quite correct (and was incorrectly stated on the Microsoft press release):
Moodle 1.x is GPLv2 *or later*.
Moodle 2.x is GPLv3 *or later*.
The plugin is totally compatible for users to use, the only problem is for distributing the current MS plugin with Moodle 2.x
No, you are not distributing when installing it yourself.
Either way, even if they were in violation it's up to the copyright holders sue and some how I don't see Microsoft sueing people for using some PHP plugin that interfaces with their services that they want people to use.
In order to install the files onto a customer's machine, I have to copy the files onto their machine, and so yes, I am distributing it. If I install both Moodle, and Microsoft's plugin, then I am distributing them as a combined work.
If you want to assume that Microsoft won't sue you, then that's up to you. Companies usually do not have the luxury of saying "oh, let's just cross our fingers and hope they don't sue". Companies have to play it safe. Besides, it's not just Microsoft who can sue, but also any of the many copyright holders of Moodle, plus any of the authors of the additional plugins that I happen to also install on the customer's machine.
To get something done, a committee should consist of no more than three persons, two of them absent.