12 ms·
> They are only suing customers who refuse to pay licensing fees or remove offending software. That's the point: they are suing users because they demand those
by geezerjay 8y ago
> They are only suing customers who refuse to pay licensing fees or remove offending software.
That's the point: they are suing users because they demand those users pay licensing fees.
What other programming language and/or software stack comes with that risk?
- pjmlp 8y agoDelphi, Common Lisp, C, C++, .NET, Smalltalk, SQL Server, Informix, DB 2, Informix, Rational, WebSphere, IBM i, IBM z, ClearPath, Aix, HP-UX,INTEGRITY OS,..... Basically any software stack sold with a commercial license.
- scarface74 8y agoYou’ve never had to pay a “licensing fee” to use .Net.
- pjmlp 8y agoSo you were pirating Visual Studio?
- scarface74 8y agoYou’ve been able to download msbuild for free for at least 10 years that I’ve been using it. You don’t install Visual Studio on your build server. But, until .Net Core, .Net was considered a part of Windows. There was no separate license. As far as the support lifecycle, you get three years of support for the LTS releases of .Net Core and you don’t pay MS for it. https://www.microsoft.com/net/platform/support-policy https://www.microsoft.com/net/platform/support-policy For .Net Framework, it’s tied to the support lifecycle of the version of Windows it was introduced with.
- pjmlp 8y ago> You don’t install Visual Studio on your build server. Ah, you never used Enterprise frameworks with VS plugins it seems. The joy of building Sharepoint plugins .NET applications are for the customers, not for running on our computers. Before it went open source we surely needed Studio to do any kind of meaningful development and respective production deployments.
- scarface74 8y agoAnd you didn’t have to pay continuing license fees for use or support. I worked for two companies that used Visual 2008 for years after newer versions came out because we had to support ruggedized Windows Mobile devices and that was the last version that supported it. They just ended support for VS 2008 in April of this year. https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/visualstudio/2017/04/10/end-of-support-for-visual-studio-2008-in-one-year/ https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/visualstudio/2017/04/10/end...
- geezerjay 8y ago> You’ve been able to download msbuild for free for at least 10 years that I’ve been using it. You don’t install Visual Studio on your build server. There is also, of course, projects such as Mono. I don't recall Mono developers having ever been sued. In fact I recall that the people behind Mono were actually hired and paid a big chunk of cash to work for Microsoft.
- pjmlp 8y agoMono is a partial implementation of .NET, no serious .NET shop ever considered using it for production work until they got bought by Microsoft. I did several ports from .NET to Java as means to have the software run on UNIX platforms.
- shakna 8y agoSo the difference is, Microsoft bought Mono, whereas Oracle sued their customers... Still not seeing how using .Net would open me up to a lawsuit, but any Oracle license might.
- scarface74 8y agoAnd Mono now supports .Net Standard 2.0...
- pjmlp 8y ago"Microsoft filed a lawsuit late Friday against an IP address, alleging that an individual or group of individuals has been using that IP address to illegally activate copies of Windows, Office, and other products without the proper license." https://www.geekwire.com/2017/microsoft-just-sued-ip-address-windows-office-piracy-claims/ https://www.geekwire.com/2017/microsoft-just-sued-ip-address... Same thing, Oracle only sued companies using Java licenses illegally.
- shakna 8y agoMicrosoft suing Comcast for bruteforce-activating thousands of licenses, is not nearly the same as Oracle suing a customer because their definition of general computing is loosely defined.
- dhd415 8y agoVS has never been required to develop on the .NET platform. E.g., CSC works fine for C#.
- pjmlp 8y agoDeveloping in .NET is much more than writing CLI apps in C#.
- maxlybbert 8y agoStarting with XP, all versions of Windows have included a C# compiler in the .Net framework, if you’re willing to use the command line. And Mono has been usable for most things for a long time. And Microsoft has offered free versions of Visual Studio — which may have feature restrictions, but which can be used for production — for more than a decade. And, if you prefer the command line, you can find free SDKs that include everything you might want. Although Microsoft makes a lot of money on development tools, it seems to think that giving away versions of those tools can help drive demand for Windows. Sun tried the same thing, but then advertised Java as making the operating system and hardware irrelevant, so free JDKs don’t appear to have sold many Solaris systems.
- pjmlp 8y ago99% of the typical .NET apps aren't buildable with that bundled compiler, due to lack of associated tooling, windows services and additional libraries. Those free versions of Visual Studio weren't allowed for production when they were called Visual Studio Express. Visual Studio Community only allows production use for companies up to 5 employees, with a specific yearly revenue. Better read the licenses.
- scarface74 8y agoHow so? That same tooling is used on the build server that compiles the app. From looking at job postings, .Net on the desktop is basically dead. Most companies that are still using .Net are doing it on the server.
- thrower123 8y agoI don't really think that is accurate... There's a lot of desktop .NET development going on still. And for all the buzz that Core is getting, it's still not feature-complete with the 4.5+ full desktop framework.
- scarface74 8y agoWhere is all of this desktop .Net development for new projects? There is no momentum for .Net or practically any other desktop development. The only major companies still making any real money on the desktop are Microsoft and Adobe. Anyone else looking for desktop developers are doing internal apps and they are trying to move as quickly to the web as possible.
- HelloNurse 8y agoYou are confused. Pirated Visual Studio is like pirated IntelliJ: an advanced and optional development tool, not what everybody but you is discussing. The new commercial JDK is like Microsoft suddenly asking expensive license fees for using .Net "in production" (which they actually do indirectly, and with clear-cut boundaries, through expensive enterprise Windows SKUs)
- scarface74 8y ago.Net Framework is clearly on life support. .Net Core is the wave of the future. It’s open source, supported for at least 3 years and no license fees...
- artimaeis 8y agoThe .NET Framework is healthier than ever. Every revision since 4.5.2 follows the support lifecycle of the parent OS (which generally is much more than 3 years) .NET Framework has never had a license fee. An argument could be made that part of the cost of Windows OS is a .NET Framework licensing fee, but the fact is if you're developing for Framework then Windows is already in your purview. Admittedly, the .NET Framework is not open source. But a good amount of its source code is available for review: https://github.com/Microsoft/referencesource https://github.com/Microsoft/referencesource https://referencesource.microsoft.com/ https://referencesource.microsoft.com/
- scarface74 8y agoI’m not saying .Net Framework is going to be abandoned by Microsoft. But few companies are going to invest money in new .Net Framework initiatives, and Microsoft’s energy is definitely focused on .Net Core and just making sure .Net Framework stays up to date with .Net Standard. I wouldn’t bet my career on .Net framework or desktop development in general anymore than Webforms. The last time I was looking for a job, there were companies that offering me architect positions paying $10K - $15K more than the job I accepted to lead projects that were doing ASP.Net MVC, Sql server, etc hosted on IIS using .Net framework. I saw the writing on the wall, I took a job that was more or less a vertical salary move, and “self demoted” so I could jump on newer tech.
- artimaeis 8y agohttps://web.archive.org/web/20080406140317/http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/express/aa718399.aspx https://web.archive.org/web/20080406140317/http://msdn2.micr... > 4. Can I use Express Editions for commercial use? > Yes, there are no licensing restrictions for applications built using the Express Editions. Visual Studio Express (and now Community) editions have always allowed for commercial development.
- pjmlp 8y agoDid you bothered to actually read what is supported regarding enterprise development, the typical .NET customer?
- scarface74 8y agoWhat’s missing from the Express Edition that most “enterprise software” needs?
- artimaeis 8y agoFTA: > With Visual C++ 2005 Express you can build both native and managed applications. Using the .NET Framework you can easily create Windows Forms, console, and class library applications. By downloading the Windows Platform SDK (freely available) you can build applications that take full advantage of the Win32 API. Web developers should use Visual Web Developer 2005 Express Edition. I mean, I'm pretty sure Win Forms, Console apps, and class libraries were all most of us were using .NET for back in 2005 (I wouldn't know for sure as I was in high school still). Don't get me wrong, there were and are advantages to the non-free versions of Visual Studio. Notably, until 2017 I believe, was extensions. But there's just a lot of misunderstanding in this thread about the general licensing model of .NET and its toolchain.
- scarface74 8y agoI wasn’t in high school and that was all most people were doing.
- geezerjay 8y agoCan you state a single example of a Delphy/Common Lisp/C/C++/C# user who has been sued for developing software with those languages?
- pjmlp 8y agoAnyone that used pirate versions to sell software and was caught doing it by the national agencies like BSA in UK.
- scarface74 8y agoHow do you “pirate” .Net?
- pjmlp 8y agoBy pirating Visual Studio before .NET went open source. Express versions were only allowed for education purposes, and only started to be available around Visual Studio 2008. The original .NET SDK was a bare bones command line SDK without any of the tooling that actually makes development in .NET actually worthwhile.
- scarface74 8y agoThe original link is dead, but the following post quotes from it. https://forums.asp.net/t/1204510.aspx?visual+studio+express+and+business+use https://forums.asp.net/t/1204510.aspx?visual+studio+express+... Can I use Express Editions for commercial use? Yes, there are no licensing restrictions for applications built using Visual Studio Express Editions.
- pjmlp 8y agoExpress version did not support Visual Studio plugins.
- scarface74 8y ago
- godelmachine 8y agoI am specifically interested in an example that shows C and C++ users were sued. Please do.
- pjmlp 8y agoAnyone using pirate versions of Visual Studio, Intel, IBM, HP, TI, ARM,... C and C++ compilers, caught during a software inspection by the respective fiscal authorities.
- thanatos_dem 8y agoSo no example in particular then?
- pjmlp 8y agoIf it makes you happy that I don't have access to the press or published reports of all countries where fiscal authorities actually do their job, then no.
- godelmachine 8y agoNot that anyone is happy, but at least I am astounded to know that such a thing exists. I know Oracle had sued Google for using Java some 3 years ago, and that amount ran into billions, but I thought that must be some issue exclusive to Big Corps.
- pjmlp 8y agoYes such a thing does exist. https://www.bsa.org/?sc_lang=re-EM https://www.bsa.org/?sc_lang=re-EM https://www.assoft.org/pt/ https://www.assoft.org/pt/ Occasionally they organize surprise audits in collaboration with the respective countries customs police. Here is an old report (in Portuguese) about 40 000 illegal copies being caught from several businesses. https://www.policiajudiciaria.pt/pirataria-informatica/ https://www.policiajudiciaria.pt/pirataria-informatica/