Mistake in the Vista EULA?
-
I'm not a lawyer, but... Section 9 reads like this: "9. MICROSOFT .NET BENCHMARK TESTING. The software includes one or more components of the .NET Framework 3.0 (".NET Components"). You may conduct internal benchmark testing of those components. You may disclose the results of any benchmark test of those components, provided that you comply with the conditions set forth at http://go.microsoft/fwlink/?LinkID=66406. Notwithstanding any other agreement you may have with Microsoft, if you disclose such benchmark test results, Microsoft shall have the right to disclose the results of benchmark tests it conducts of your products that compete with the applicable .NET Component, provided it complies with the same conditions set forth at http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkID=66406." I'm guessing they put this clause is in response to companies like Sony who've been saying crap about Xbox 360 specs and such. But .NET 3.0 is a separate product from .NET 2.0 that's installed separately and used in conjunction. Most of the performance critical stuff is in .NET 2.0, not .NET 3.0... Is it just me, or have they shot themselves in the foot with the .NET 3.0 misnomer[^] again?
-
I'm not a lawyer, but... Section 9 reads like this: "9. MICROSOFT .NET BENCHMARK TESTING. The software includes one or more components of the .NET Framework 3.0 (".NET Components"). You may conduct internal benchmark testing of those components. You may disclose the results of any benchmark test of those components, provided that you comply with the conditions set forth at http://go.microsoft/fwlink/?LinkID=66406. Notwithstanding any other agreement you may have with Microsoft, if you disclose such benchmark test results, Microsoft shall have the right to disclose the results of benchmark tests it conducts of your products that compete with the applicable .NET Component, provided it complies with the same conditions set forth at http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkID=66406." I'm guessing they put this clause is in response to companies like Sony who've been saying crap about Xbox 360 specs and such. But .NET 3.0 is a separate product from .NET 2.0 that's installed separately and used in conjunction. Most of the performance critical stuff is in .NET 2.0, not .NET 3.0... Is it just me, or have they shot themselves in the foot with the .NET 3.0 misnomer[^] again?
That clause is in the Windows Server 2003 EULA as well, as I recall (well, it refers to .NET 1.1 rather than 3.0). It's there as a PR stunt against Sun, whose Java EULA says you're not allowed to benchmark. The second part, about Microsoft having the right to benchmark the licensee's competing products, is basically an attempt to get around that clause in the Java licence.
Stability. What an interesting concept. -- Chris Maunder
-
That clause is in the Windows Server 2003 EULA as well, as I recall (well, it refers to .NET 1.1 rather than 3.0). It's there as a PR stunt against Sun, whose Java EULA says you're not allowed to benchmark. The second part, about Microsoft having the right to benchmark the licensee's competing products, is basically an attempt to get around that clause in the Java licence.
Stability. What an interesting concept. -- Chris Maunder
-
That clause is in the Windows Server 2003 EULA as well, as I recall (well, it refers to .NET 1.1 rather than 3.0). It's there as a PR stunt against Sun, whose Java EULA says you're not allowed to benchmark. The second part, about Microsoft having the right to benchmark the licensee's competing products, is basically an attempt to get around that clause in the Java licence.
Stability. What an interesting concept. -- Chris Maunder
:laugh: Brilliant. I like it!
Ant. I'm hard, yet soft.
I'm coloured, yet clear.
I'm fruity and sweet.
I'm jelly, what am I? Muse on it further, I shall return! - David Walliams (Little Britain) -
I'm not a lawyer, but... Section 9 reads like this: "9. MICROSOFT .NET BENCHMARK TESTING. The software includes one or more components of the .NET Framework 3.0 (".NET Components"). You may conduct internal benchmark testing of those components. You may disclose the results of any benchmark test of those components, provided that you comply with the conditions set forth at http://go.microsoft/fwlink/?LinkID=66406. Notwithstanding any other agreement you may have with Microsoft, if you disclose such benchmark test results, Microsoft shall have the right to disclose the results of benchmark tests it conducts of your products that compete with the applicable .NET Component, provided it complies with the same conditions set forth at http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkID=66406." I'm guessing they put this clause is in response to companies like Sony who've been saying crap about Xbox 360 specs and such. But .NET 3.0 is a separate product from .NET 2.0 that's installed separately and used in conjunction. Most of the performance critical stuff is in .NET 2.0, not .NET 3.0... Is it just me, or have they shot themselves in the foot with the .NET 3.0 misnomer[^] again?
reinux wrote:
But .NET 3.0 is a separate product from .NET 2.0 that's installed separately and used in conjunction. Most of the performance critical stuff is in .NET 2.0, not .NET 3.0...
Won't .NET 3.0 incorporate the functionality of .NET 2.0 as well? I doubt the final release will require that you install 2.0 first and then 3.0. It will be like 2.0 is now - it doesn't require that 1.1 be installed first. Cheers, Drew.
-
reinux wrote:
But .NET 3.0 is a separate product from .NET 2.0 that's installed separately and used in conjunction. Most of the performance critical stuff is in .NET 2.0, not .NET 3.0...
Won't .NET 3.0 incorporate the functionality of .NET 2.0 as well? I doubt the final release will require that you install 2.0 first and then 3.0. It will be like 2.0 is now - it doesn't require that 1.1 be installed first. Cheers, Drew.
The 3.0 installer will install 2.0 if it's not already installed, but they're installed in separate directories and are entirely different products altogether. http://blogs.msdn.com/jasonz/archive/2006/06/13/630066.aspx[^] Complete BS.