> On Tue, 2003-06-17 at 10:18, Levi Bard wrote:
>> Well, it's every developer's responsibility not to submit code that is
>> not
>> his/her own, regardless whether the code is going into an open-source
>> product or not. (Although, if nobody sees the source of your product,
>> it's easy to get away with using large blocks of code in a manner
>> contrary
>> to its license, as certain monopolistic corporations have been alleged
>> to
>> have done.)
>
> Does that mean I'm not the only k00k out here who firmly believes
> Microsoft has all sorts of GPL/OSS code in their products?
>
> We _know_ they have BSD-licensed code I am firmly convinced that they
> have a whole lot more than just BSD code in there, whether it's on
> purpose or accidentally. People can't see the code, and most of their
> programmers come right out of college with little to no real
> experience. Why shouldn't they cut-n-paste some code if it's already
> out there, and even if they found out, why should Microsoft care?
> Nobody is EVER going to see that code, and if anyone ever makes a claim
> and tries to have it legally disclosed, they have enough money to sue
> them and their ancestors and descendents into oblivion to prevent anyone
> from disclosing the code that might prove it.
I definitely believe it.
I have an acquaintance who used to run string searches (strings(1)) on MS
binaries for things he thought would reveal GPL or other open-license
origin. He found several things that were highly suggestive, although I'm
not sure if he was ever to put together something 100% conclusive.
Levi
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Fri Aug 01 2014 - 16:51:49 EDT