http://www.fsf.org/news/dont-depend-on-mono

[Bill McGonigle]

On 07/07/2009 07:42 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> RAND does not necessarily mean royalty-free

Oh, I agree.  The trick is nobody knows what those RAND terms are.
Free, not free, something-we-never-dreamed-of, etc. Various folks (e.g.
OSNews) have been attempting to get Microsoft to present them with a
RAND license offer to clear this up.

So, the legal theory is that since ECMA requires RAND license terms, and
the spec is a published ECMA spec, and various people have been trying
to get a RAND license offer for a while, that if Microsoft drags you
before a magistrate charging that you didn't get a license, that
"licenses were not available and therefore implicitly not required"
would convince him that the prosecution is malicious and get the case
tossed out on its ear.

Whether the argument holds any water or not, I have no idea, it's just
what I've heard from defenders.

-Bill

-- 
Bill McGonigle, Owner           Work: 603.448.4440
BFC Computing, LLC              Home: 603.448.1668
http://www.bfccomputing.com/    Cell: 603.252.2606
Twitter, etc.: bill_mcgonigle   Page: 603.442.1833
Email, IM, VOIP: bill at bfccomputing.com
Blog: http://blog.bfccomputing.com/
VCard: http://bfccomputing.com/vcard/bill.vcf