5 ms·

It would be interesting to see this engineer's statements tested in court. Microsoft are highly motivated to protect their source code so there would have to be

It would be interesting to see this engineer's statements tested in court. Microsoft are highly motivated to protect their source code so there would have to be a reason why they haven't. ReactOS is definitely NOT a mosquito to an elephant in violation terms if this engineers comments have validity. I'm thinking patents, copyrights etc. The fact that Microsoft haven't acted for all this time is by itself evidence that could be interesting to present. Contrast this with another chunk of law in trademarks where ignoring use and not challenging it strengthens someone elses laches defense. (Usual disclaimer: I'm not a lawyer so these words are likely just words assembled by 400000 chimps for bananas)

discordance 7y ago
I find the attitude more interesting.. on one side we have Linux embedded in Windows, more Linux VMs on Azure than Windows Server, MS employees proudly brandishing shirts with 'I heart Linux' and 'I heart OSS' and on the other side we have Windows Kernal developers saying their ideas were stolen. Maybe it's a sign of the relationship between Azure and Windows teams?
- dingo_bat 7y ago
  How are these two things related at all? I use Linux too but would be highly annoyed if someone stole my car. Are you implying that Linux users are in some way "stealing" from the Linux authors?
- zyang 7y ago
  I interned at Microsoft in late 2000's. The sales engineers had an "anti oss" budget. Many of these guys still work at Microsoft today, now "hearts" open source and linux...
  - dvfjsdhgfv 7y ago
    They have no choice, Linux already won big time on the server, so the only way was to embrace it in a way that would bring them money. And they succeeded big time. Now most young developers don't remember all the dirty tactics used year after year by MS to kill all competition, whether commercial or open source.
    - jasonvorhe 7y ago
      Also consider the amount of people leaving and joining Microsoft since than as well as the possibility that lots of the old people a) didn't like everything Microsoft did back then and b) are capable of changing and developing over the years.
  - StudentStuff 7y ago
    Microsoft did try to hijack LinuxFest Northwest a few years ago, taking over half the event space, sponsoring the event and providing the afterparties (which were tightly controlled, compared to prior/following years where any LFNW attendee could just show up). Multiple people I know stopped attending LFNW that year, and will not return. Hopefully other conferences like SeaGL don't fall for the Microsoft embrace scam, as it injured LFNW pretty badly.
- icegreentea2 7y ago
  The comment is from one dude in late 2017 - it probably doesn't mean shit. Like dude is talking about "there is absolutely no way on earth this was written from a clean sheet only from the available public documentation.", but that's not the bar for reverse engineering systems. It is legal (if you do it right anyways) to examine, use, and disassemble software in the process of reverse engineering.
  - jimueller 7y ago
    This is the first sensible comment in here. A lot of jumping to conclusions.
  - whereistimbo 7y ago
    What about EULA then? I know in some cases it is not enforceable, but I think it might apply in case of reverse engineering.
    - d1zzy 7y ago
      It has applied in the past: https://www.eff.org/cases/blizzard-v-bnetd https://www.eff.org/cases/blizzard-v-bnetd
    - dragonwriter 7y ago
      If the EULA is a valid contract, and if you can prove someone involved accepted it before participating, you might have an action for breach of contract against that person, but if what they did wouldn't have been a violation of copyright on its own, the EULA won't change that.
    - icegreentea2 7y ago
      The Windows 10 EULA (XP has similar verbage) says: c. Restrictions. The device manufacturer or installer and Microsoft reserve all rights (such as rights under intellectual property laws) not expressly granted in this agreement. For example, this license does not give you any right to, and you may not: (skipping a few) (vi) reverse engineer, decompile, or disassemble the software, or attempt to do so, except and only to the extent that the foregoing restriction is (a) permitted by applicable law; (b) permitted by licensing terms governing the use of open-source components that may be included with the software; or (c) required to debug changes to any libraries licensed under the GNU Lesser General Public License which are included with and linked to by the software; and The EULA says you can reverse engineer to the extent that is legal in your jurisdiction.
- segfaultbuserr 7y ago
  > Windows Kernal developers Windows Kernel. To me best knowledge, Windows was never ported to Commodore 64 ;-) * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KERNAL https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KERNAL
- toyg 7y ago
  Big companies are hardly ever coherent, let alone after a big pivot like Nadella’s. The two things are also not exclusive: it might well be that MS “loves OSS” and that the ReactOS kernel was lifted wholesale from a Windows leak. Besides, there are many who think projects like ReactOS or Mono are actually a net negative for the FOSS ecosystem, since they reduce the pressure on developers to switch away from Windows-based stacks.

discordance 7y ago

I find the attitude more interesting.. on one side we have Linux embedded in Windows, more Linux VMs on Azure than Windows Server, MS employees proudly brandishing shirts with 'I heart Linux' and 'I heart OSS' and on the other side we have Windows Kernal developers saying their ideas were stolen. Maybe it's a sign of the relationship between Azure and Windows teams?

dingo_bat 7y ago
How are these two things related at all? I use Linux too but would be highly annoyed if someone stole my car. Are you implying that Linux users are in some way "stealing" from the Linux authors?
zyang 7y ago
I interned at Microsoft in late 2000's. The sales engineers had an "anti oss" budget. Many of these guys still work at Microsoft today, now "hearts" open source and linux...
- dvfjsdhgfv 7y ago
  They have no choice, Linux already won big time on the server, so the only way was to embrace it in a way that would bring them money. And they succeeded big time. Now most young developers don't remember all the dirty tactics used year after year by MS to kill all competition, whether commercial or open source.
  - jasonvorhe 7y ago
    Also consider the amount of people leaving and joining Microsoft since than as well as the possibility that lots of the old people a) didn't like everything Microsoft did back then and b) are capable of changing and developing over the years.
- StudentStuff 7y ago
  Microsoft did try to hijack LinuxFest Northwest a few years ago, taking over half the event space, sponsoring the event and providing the afterparties (which were tightly controlled, compared to prior/following years where any LFNW attendee could just show up). Multiple people I know stopped attending LFNW that year, and will not return. Hopefully other conferences like SeaGL don't fall for the Microsoft embrace scam, as it injured LFNW pretty badly.
icegreentea2 7y ago
The comment is from one dude in late 2017 - it probably doesn't mean shit. Like dude is talking about "there is absolutely no way on earth this was written from a clean sheet only from the available public documentation.", but that's not the bar for reverse engineering systems. It is legal (if you do it right anyways) to examine, use, and disassemble software in the process of reverse engineering.
- jimueller 7y ago
  This is the first sensible comment in here. A lot of jumping to conclusions.
- whereistimbo 7y ago
  What about EULA then? I know in some cases it is not enforceable, but I think it might apply in case of reverse engineering.
  - d1zzy 7y ago
    It has applied in the past: https://www.eff.org/cases/blizzard-v-bnetd https://www.eff.org/cases/blizzard-v-bnetd
  - dragonwriter 7y ago
    If the EULA is a valid contract, and if you can prove someone involved accepted it before participating, you might have an action for breach of contract against that person, but if what they did wouldn't have been a violation of copyright on its own, the EULA won't change that.
  - icegreentea2 7y ago
    The Windows 10 EULA (XP has similar verbage) says: c. Restrictions. The device manufacturer or installer and Microsoft reserve all rights (such as rights under intellectual property laws) not expressly granted in this agreement. For example, this license does not give you any right to, and you may not: (skipping a few) (vi) reverse engineer, decompile, or disassemble the software, or attempt to do so, except and only to the extent that the foregoing restriction is (a) permitted by applicable law; (b) permitted by licensing terms governing the use of open-source components that may be included with the software; or (c) required to debug changes to any libraries licensed under the GNU Lesser General Public License which are included with and linked to by the software; and The EULA says you can reverse engineer to the extent that is legal in your jurisdiction.
segfaultbuserr 7y ago
> Windows Kernal developers Windows Kernel. To me best knowledge, Windows was never ported to Commodore 64 ;-) * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KERNAL https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KERNAL
toyg 7y ago
Big companies are hardly ever coherent, let alone after a big pivot like Nadella’s. The two things are also not exclusive: it might well be that MS “loves OSS” and that the ReactOS kernel was lifted wholesale from a Windows leak. Besides, there are many who think projects like ReactOS or Mono are actually a net negative for the FOSS ecosystem, since they reduce the pressure on developers to switch away from Windows-based stacks.