Microsoft Was Distributing Ubuntu Linux 281
ausage writes "Groklaw has noted that for the last few days, Microsoft has been distributing Unbuntu Desktop Linux from the Windows Marketplace Website. The page is gone now, but can still — as of this morning — be seen using Google cache. 'Heaven only knows that's true, simply perfect for laptops, desktops and servers. The part Microsoft got wrong is it says the license is "Free" and "No limitations". Actually, the GPL does set some limitations, like what you are responsible to do if you redistribute.'"
Am I wrong? (Score:5, Informative)
Screenshot (Score:3, Informative)
http://mrose.org/images/slashdot/microsoft_ubuntu
pretty funny.
Re:System Requirements (Score:5, Informative)
limitations of the GPL .. (Score:2, Informative)
Actually that isn't a limitation, it prevents you from imposing limitations on what downstream developers can do with the code.
you are correct (Score:5, Informative)
Windows Marketplace had a link to CNET's Download.com site. So MS was not distributing.
Still humorous though!
Re:confusing (Score:5, Informative)
Microsoft has distributed GPL software in the past (Services for Unix). Just not Linux per se.
Stereotype review needed (Score:2, Informative)
Even the parliment went conservative, although not by a huge majority.
And Sarkozy likes the US.
It's a CNET thing (Score:5, Informative)
From the how to get listed page at the Windows Marketplace:
"Packaged Software, Hardware, & Devices: If your product is available in packaged format, you can offer it at Windows Marketplace by signing up with CNET.com."
The category for Ubuntu form Download.com:
Windows > Utilities & Drivers > Device Drivers > BIOS & System Updates
Eerily familiar, no?
This is a total non-story. Microsoft isn't distributing anything and CNET needs to fix their categories.
Re:Not Quite (Score:3, Informative)
License Type - Free
Limitations - No Limitations
You can even get spyware from Microsoft (Score:1, Informative)
so i did a quick check on Mcafees Siteadvisor and sure enough that site distributes rather nasty malware called WhenU
http://www.siteadvisor.com/sites/windowsmarketpla
logging in to my box at home and browsing it from there shows me the site lists all sorts of toolbars and adware/spyware downloads
nice to know Microsoft is providing an outlet so that people can infect their OS with confidence
Rating/Comments (Score:2, Informative)
Something that doesn't show up in the Google Cache that really added to the whole thing before it was deleted: Ubuntu got a 5-star rating, and there were several glowing commentaries about how much more usable and stable it is compared to Windows.
Re:Where can I (Score:1, Informative)
Re:Distributing? (Score:3, Informative)
Only if they distributed it under the GPLv3, and it's not under the GPLv3 yet as the GPLv3 doesn't actually exist (still in draft, not approved or ratified or whatever, just a final draft.)
Under GPLv2 they would however be granting license to use any Microsoft code that had been copied into Linux. Hopefully there is none of that and so it would be quite irrelevant to us.
Re:confusing (Score:3, Informative)
While your company was well within its legal rights to not pay, I wonder whether the fact that it is "in collections" will affect your company's D&B rating and Paydex score. Not a big problem if you don't want to borrow money or need credit from a supplier, but it could be a hassle nonetheless.
In fact they had not 1, but 2 offerings for Ubuntu (Score:1, Informative)
Wubi on windows Marketplace (Google cache) [216.239.59.104]
Re:you are correct (Score:3, Informative)
Re:confusing (Score:3, Informative)
1) From the GPL v2 on source distribution:
c) Accompany it with the information you received as to the offer
to distribute corresponding source code. (This alternative is
allowed only for noncommercial distribution and only if you
received the program in object code or executable form with such
an offer, in accord with Subsection b above.)
Now explain how putting up a link on a webpage counts as commercial
distribution.
2) Title of the GPL v2:
GNU GENERAL PUBLIC LICENSE
TERMS AND CONDITIONS FOR COPYING, DISTRIBUTION AND MODIFICATION
Note that the title is not, CONTRACT TO FORCE YOU OUT OF BUSINESS
TOMORROW, or SNEAKY AGREEMENT TO STEAL YOUR PATENTS.
Re:confusing (Score:1, Informative)
Re:System Requirements (Score:2, Informative)
Re:confusing (Score:4, Informative)
Re:confusing (Score:5, Informative)
Services for Unix also includes various GNU utilities licensed under the GPL. Just for giggles:
ftp://ftp.microsoft.com/developr/interix/interix2
Re:confusing (Score:3, Informative)
Therefore they are not bound by the GPL distribution requirements, they didn't even have to accept the GPL as a license.
Moot point. No one has to "accept" the GPL; there's no button to click. The way it works is that the GPL is what gives you the right to distribute at all, so if you distribute a GPLed app, you are bound by the GPL for that app.
If you don't like it, well, no one is forcing you to distribute it.
That said, I don't believe that pointing to a Sourceforge link counts as "distributing".