Re: Microsoft and free speech

[Nick FitzGerald <nick () virus-l demon co uk>]

rms () computerbytesman com wrote:

> Yikes.  I wrote a benchmark program which measures the overhead of a
> JavaScript program calling into a .NET class.  The numbers were extremely
> small and I was quite impressed with how Microsoft was able to make COM and
> .NET play together so well.  However, it now looks like I have to go to jail
> since this testing may have violated the .NET license agreement because I
> told other people how well .NET performs. 

As I recall, the NY DA went after McAfee/Network Associates because of 
a similar "gag cluase" against publishing comparative reviews involving 
the McAfee AV products and McAfee lost (or settled out of court before 
it finally made it to trial??).

I suspect that the "prohibition" you refer to is equally unforceable in 
the real world, as opposed to the cloud cuckoo land inhabited by a 
significant chunk of MS' corporate lawyer droids...

...

That said, such a prohibition _might_ be "reasonable" on beta or other 
"pre-release" code where performance would specifically be expected NOT 
to be at finally optimized for release, and it might not be entirely 
unexpected of a vendor to try to protect itself from "possibly 
misleading" performance stats based on tests with such code.


Regards,

Nick FitzGerald

_______________________________________________
Fun and Misc security discussion for OT posts.
https://linuxbox.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/funsec
Note: funsec is a public and open mailing list.