Naturally, they found it to be tricky, infectious, ‘orrible stuff.
Not like good, safe, Microsoft Software ™. It’s delicious, and oh-so-nutricious.
Why on earth would anyone pay Microsofts general council to pen a report on open source software. That’s like asking a wolf to write up a report on improvements to be made in hen house security… I’m thinking that “less is more” would be the expected answer in both cases.
Now, all arguments about the usefulness of a wolf authored hen report aside, isn’t it a waste of New Zealand taxpayers dollars to authorize this crap? I’m offended on so many levels…
Scoop NZ has the proverbial scoop on it along with some comments from a Green party rep.
Scoop: Why did Microsoft lawyers pen “neutral” report?
“The report describes open source licenses as ‘infectious’ and described how applications can be ‘quarantined’. This creates the false impression that open source software is some kind of virus, and is reminiscent of Microsoft CEO Steve Bullmer’s description of [open source operating system] Linux as ‘a cancer’,”
