Starting off from last week's news that Microsoft's EULA for at
least some of its SDK's forbids use of "potentially viral" software
in conjunction with development under them, this article says
Microsoft might be trying to hide something about the power it
confers its developers, including an unlikely "WinXP forced open"
scenario. Didja know the GPL was designed to "eat your
"If someone within Microsoft or contracted to Microsoft
could be legally deemed to have the authority to accept the
provisions of the GPL while incorporating GPL code into Microsoft
software, then Microsoft would be bound by the GPL. Some punk could
force them to GPL WinXP. It's even conceivable (well, if you think
lawyer hard enough) that some of the many open source sympathising
grunts in Redmond could plant the code deliberately. And you
thought we were joking last week (Commie cell in MS secretly
pushing GPL to customers).
That's what they see as viral about it. You commit to it, or
somebody commits to it on your behalf, and it starts eating your
business. That is of course what it's designed to do, and from the
GPL perspective this is A Good Thing. From Microsoft's, it's death,
but from the GPL perspective that is possibly An Even Better Thing.
This is war, and nobody ever said it wasn't."
Some of the products that appear on this site are from companies from which QuinStreet receives compensation. This compensation may impact how and where products appear on this site including, for example, the order in which they appear. QuinStreet does not include all companies or all types of products available in the marketplace.