According to the "In re Spansion" case[0], a patent promise is equivalent to a licence. Given that and the MIT licence, I don't see much of any way for MS to ab

According to the "In re Spansion" case[0], a patent promise is equivalent to a licence. Given that and the MIT licence, I don't see much of any way for MS to abuse patents against .NET users (IANAL). Amusingly, Apple itself was the beneficiary of the ruling. Speaking of Apple, given its history it's not impossible to imagine a closed source "Swift 6" with no backward compatibility, leaving only a very tiny ecosystem for the open source Swift. [0] https://patentlyo.com/patent/2013/01/3rd-circuit-covenant-not-to-sue-is-a-license-and-therefore-not-dischargeable-in-bankruptcy.html https://patentlyo.com/patent/2013/01/3rd-circuit-covenant-no...