14 DAY TRIAL // Microsoft played around with open source and got burned with the GNU General Public License version 3 (GPLv3), revealed the Free Software Foundation. Back in November 2006, the Redmond company inked a Windows-Linux interoperability and intellectual property assurance agreement with Linux distributor Novell. The open source community reacted to that agreement and pointed an accusatory finger at Microsoft, claiming that the company was frightening and forcing customers to pay a bill synonymous with the proprietization of free software just to be safe from potential lawsuits. In addition, the Free Software Foundation responded to the Microsoft-Novell partnership by drafting version 3 of the GNU General Public License. "In particular, we added a provision to ensure that, if any user receives a discriminatory patent promise from Microsoft as a result of purchasing a copy of a GPLv3 program from a Microsoft fulfillment agent, Microsoft would be bound by GPLv3 to extend that same promise of safety to all downstream users of that software," the Free Software Foundation revealed.
Microsoft however issued its own response to GPLv3 stating that just because it had dealt with open source, explicitly having distributed certificates for Novell support services, it doesn't mean that it was a party to the GNU General Public License version 3, or that it was accepting the license in any way. "We do not agree with Microsoft's characterization of the situation involving GPLv3. Microsoft cannot by any act of anticipatory repudiation divest itself of its obligation to respect others' copyrights. If Microsoft distributes our works licensed under GPLv3, or pays others to distribute them on its behalf, it is bound to do so under the terms of that license. It may not do so under any other terms; it cannot declare itself exempt from the requirements of GPLv3", the Free Software Foundation added.
Microsoft yet again faces accusations of anticompetitive business model, and repeated attacks on the free software industry. However, the Free Software Foundation's perspective is that through its involvement with Novell and open source, Microsoft is bound by the GPLv3 and cannot, in any manner, declare itself exempt from the requirements inherent with the license.
"Microsoft has said that it expects respect for its so-called "intellectual property"--a propaganda term designed to confuse patent law with copyright and other unrelated laws, and to muddy the different issues they raise. We will ensure--and, to the extent of our resources, assist other GPLv3 licensors in ensuring--that Microsoft respects our copyrights and complies with our licenses.", stated the Free Software Foundation.