License compatibility of MS-PL and MS-CL (Was: (RE: Groklaw's OSI item (was: When will CPAL actually be _used_?))

[John Cowan]

Thatcher, Jim E. (Woodcock Washburn) scripsit:

> I am responding to the issues raised in this and related threads on this
> discussion at Microsoft's request.

Thank you.  That is admirably clear, and I'm glad to see that it agrees
with my interpretations in every particular.  (Now the /. folks will be
*sure* I'm a paid Microsoft shill, I suppose.  *sigh*)

I take the liberty of quoting the points that concern me:

> The Ms-PL permits redistribution of modified or unmodified versions of
> Ms-PL-licensed code in object code/binary form under other licenses as
> long as those licenses comply with the Ms-PL.  

[...]

> By "complies with this license" the Ms-PL means that your license must
> not purport to grant more rights to the Ms-PL licensed software than are
> granted to you by the contributor(s).  

[...]

> It is Microsoft's position that copyright/patent holders have the right
> to offer to license their copyrighted/patented work under whatever terms
> they choose, including offering the work under more than one license.

I sincerely hope that these reassurances will dispose of all bogus
incompatible-with-everything claims, though I know this list far too
well to suppose that we will actually hear no more of them.

-- 
John Cowan <cowan at ccil.org>             http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
It's like if you meet an really old, really rich guy covered in liver
spots and breathing with an oxygen tank, and you say, "I want to be
rich, too, so I'm going to start walking with a cane and I'm going to
act crotchety and I'm going to get liver disease. --Wil Shipley