Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Microsoft Redefines "Open Standards"

Posted by CmdrTaco on from the gpl-isn't-really-open-either-ya-know dept.

Glyn Moody writes "Microsoft is at it again: trying to redefine what 'open' means. This time it wants open standards to be 'balanced' — for them to include patent-encumbered technologies under RAND (reasonable and non-discriminatory) terms. Which just happens to be incompatible with free software licensed under the GNU GPL."

2 of 325 comments (clear)

  1. From the... by Daemonax · · Score: 5, Informative

    From the gpl-isn't-really-open-either-ya-know dept.

    What is up with that? The majority of people that go around saying this about the GPL complain that you can't include the GPL in proprietary software or other unfortunate obscure issues. The GPL is designed to keep software licensed under it Free (or open if you prefer). Sure sometimes that causes unfortunate problems with other Free Software licenses, but while there are those that would like to take away the freedom that users and developers get with the GPL, it's a cost I'm happy with.

  2. Re:Now who's redefining "open"? by Darkness404 · · Score: 5, Informative

    Open source only means that the source is available to the users of the product.

    Nope, OSI defines open source software as software that:

    A. Free Redistribution
    B. Includes Source
    C. Allow Derived Works

    And a lot of other stuff. See http://www.opensource.org/docs/definition.php for more info.

    --
    Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.