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

[Adam Williamson]

On Tue, 2009-07-07 at 19:06 -0400, Sam Varshavchik wrote:
> Matthew Woehlke writes:
> 
> > Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote:
> >> In a couple of years Microsoft is bought by Fu-Bar Inc and there goes the
> >> promise down the drain.
> > 
> > ...if only. The odds of *any* company that might buy out M$ (well, if it 
> > isn't started by Gates and/or Ballmer and/or such) being as bad as M$ 
> > have got to be pretty high ;-).
> 
> If you want legal advice, pay a lawyer. This is not legal advice.
> 
> Microsoft's statement is what's generally called "covenant not to sue". When 

Right. This is the form of words I was going to bring up.

I thought the difference between a grant of rights and a 'covenant not
to sue' was fairly well-established and non-controversial, since that's
the exact loophole in GPLv2 that Microsoft drove the Novell agreement
through, and the main reason that GPLv3 exists. I remember the point
being discussed and explained at tedious length around the time that was
going on. So it seems a bit odd to have this long thread with some
people arguing that a 'covenant not to sue' and a 'grant of rights to
use a patent' are the same thing, when it seems a fairly
well-established principle, accepted on all sides, that they're not.

(I echo Sam's disclaimer: I'm not a lawyer and this isn't legal advice).
-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org
http://www.happyassassin.net