Hello guys, does anyone knows the implications that the CIFS and SMB Microsoft licenses may have on samba development ? http://news.com.com/2010-1075-882846.html Davide
Thanks for the article I was just wondering what this means to Samba "The Microsoft license specifically excludes software under the General Public License, commonly known as the GPL. The GPL is the software license used by Linux and by SAMBA, a popular open-source program that allows non-Microsoft systems to share files and printers with Windows." Does this mean samba is banned from interoperating with future windows products??? -----Original Message----- From: Davide Dozza [mailto:davide.dozza@yacme.com] Sent: Tuesday, April 16, 2002 9:49 AM To: samba Subject: [Samba] CIFS & SMB Microsoft licenses Hello guys, does anyone knows the implications that the CIFS and SMB Microsoft licenses may have on samba development ? http://news.com.com/2010-1075-882846.html Davide -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
which means samba cant be used in future with windows? what other products out there which has no GPL license to interoperate with windows TAS? -----Original Message----- From: Davide Dozza [mailto:davide.dozza@yacme.com] Sent: Tuesday, April 16, 2002 10:20 AM To: Javid Abdul-AJAVID1 Cc: samba Subject: Re: [Samba] CIFS & SMB Microsoft licenses Uhm... I have guessed so.... It seems that Microsoft will release the use of its patents about SMB and CIFS protocols only to companies that won't use GPL/LGPL licenses to interoperate with Win2000 and WinXP. I hope, I'm wrong..... Davide Javid Abdul-AJAVID1 wrote:> Thanks for the article > I was just wondering what this means to Samba > > "The Microsoft license specifically excludes software under the General > Public License, commonly known as the GPL. The GPL is the software license > used by Linux and by SAMBA, a popular open-source program that allows > non-Microsoft systems to share files and printers with Windows." > > Does this mean samba is banned from interoperating with future windows > products??? > > -----Original Message----- > From: Davide Dozza [mailto:davide.dozza@yacme.com] > Sent: Tuesday, April 16, 2002 9:49 AM > To: samba > Subject: [Samba] CIFS & SMB Microsoft licenses > > > > Hello guys, > > does anyone knows the implications that the CIFS and SMB Microsoft > licenses may have on samba development ? > > http://news.com.com/2010-1075-882846.html > > Davide > > >
I think Intel and Microsoft jointly developed SMB , i guess they still might have patent on it though microsoft changed SMB and called it CIFS. -----Original Message----- From: Sanjiv Bawa [mailto:sbawa@tabmaster.com] Sent: Tuesday, April 16, 2002 9:34 AM To: Davide Dozza; Javid Abdul-AJAVID1 Cc: samba Subject: RE: [Samba] CIFS & SMB Microsoft licenses My understanding is that microsoft adoped SMB. Do they actually have a patent on SMB? It can't possibly even be enforcable. SB -----Original Message----- From: samba-admin@lists.samba.org [mailto:samba-admin@lists.samba.org]On Behalf Of Davide Dozza Sent: Tuesday, April 16, 2002 10:20 AM To: Javid Abdul-AJAVID1 Cc: samba Subject: Re: [Samba] CIFS & SMB Microsoft licenses Uhm... I have guessed so.... It seems that Microsoft will release the use of its patents about SMB and CIFS protocols only to companies that won't use GPL/LGPL licenses to interoperate with Win2000 and WinXP. I hope, I'm wrong..... Davide Javid Abdul-AJAVID1 wrote:> Thanks for the article > I was just wondering what this means to Samba > > "The Microsoft license specifically excludes software under the General > Public License, commonly known as the GPL. The GPL is the software license > used by Linux and by SAMBA, a popular open-source program that allows > non-Microsoft systems to share files and printers with Windows." > > Does this mean samba is banned from interoperating with future windows > products??? > > -----Original Message----- > From: Davide Dozza [mailto:davide.dozza@yacme.com] > Sent: Tuesday, April 16, 2002 9:49 AM > To: samba > Subject: [Samba] CIFS & SMB Microsoft licenses > > > > Hello guys, > > does anyone knows the implications that the CIFS and SMB Microsoft > licenses may have on samba development ? > > http://news.com.com/2010-1075-882846.html > > Davide > > >-- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
On Tue, Apr 16, 2002 at 04:49:29PM +0200, Davide Dozza wrote:> > Hello guys, > > does anyone knows the implications that the CIFS and SMB Microsoft > licenses may have on samba development ? > > http://news.com.com/2010-1075-882846.htmlWe're consulting the legal staff at the FSF for a definitive answer on this. More when we have a US legal opinion. In the meantime, don't panic. We don't think we infringe their patent claims (but this is why we're getting a legal opinion - to make sure this is the case) and the license is for CIFS *documentation*, not any code at present. The opinion of someone who has seen this documentation (not me) is that there is nothing in it that Samba doesn't already implement. In fact it is a significant subset of the SNIA CIFS documentation which the Samba Team has helped prepare. This license seems to have been created (IMHO) to create fear uncertainty and doubt amongst Samba users and vendors using Samba - such as the comments that have been appearing on this list :-). It's a classic marketing tactic I believe. Jeremy.
> Hello guys, > > does anyone knows the implications that the CIFS and SMB Microsoft > licenses may have on samba development ? > > http://news.com.com/2010-1075-882846.html > > DavideI find this very troubling, and I hope the restriction extends no further than the documentation. I've written a very brief article about this, here: http://megarad.com/article.php?sid=714 Perhaps this will garner a little more attention. If anybody's interested in chiming in on that article, or correcting any errors I may have made, please feel free. Any responses to this email will be read with an eye toward making sure I've got my facts straight, as well. /></