Microsoft Threatens MVP For Adding Features To The Wrong Version Of Visual Studio
from the oops dept
Someone who prefers to remain anonymous, pointed us to the story of Jamie Cansdale. Cansdale wrote an add-on for Microsoft Visual Studio that was so useful that Microsoft rewarded him with MVP status. Then they realized that his add-on was designed to work on the free "Express" version of Visual Studio, and they began to threaten him, saying that he had violated the terms of service. This was doubly ridiculous, since Cansdale notes that, as a hobbyist, he only had access to the free Express version when developing his add-on, so it was only natural that his version was designed to work with it. As Cansdale pointed out that he doesn't appear to have done anything wrong (and kept asking Microsoft for evidence of what terms he violated specifically), the legal threats just got stronger and stronger, and apparently, the guy has until tomorrow to make changes to the same software Microsoft gave him an award for writing, even though no one can explain exactly what he did wrong or why he received an award one day and a legal threat afterwards. Update: In the comments, someone points us to a detailed version that gives Microsoft's side of the story and suggests this isn't as clear cut as the Register's article would have you believe.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
In a world gone mad....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Other Side
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
This made me download it
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: This made me download it
(IT Mgr having recently been extorted by mainframe software peddlers)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: This made me download it
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
It seems clear
And now Microsoft is sending legal threats because they can't beat his fair play.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Honestly, let's look at the WHOLE picture
Programmer says, "Gee thanks! That's nifty!"
Then Microsoft Manager/Engineer finally gets a report back from his team saying, "Uh oh, there's some things in here that we don't like, you need to make him stop!"
Now, Microsoft Manager/Engineer decides to take it upon himself to tell Programmer that Programmer needs to stop "hacking" Microsoft's Product, even though he knows FULL WELL that everything "in there" was in Public Domain and free to be used.
The problem here is that, and this is quite freaking amazing considering the level of training MOST Microsoft Managers have to go through, Mr. Manager/Engineer shot off his mouth stating Mr. Programmer had HACKED the product and was a bad bad boy and would no longer be getting his fat juicy reward. What Mr. Manager/Engineer should have done, IF Mr. Programmer was truly in violation of ANY license agreements, was to turn this over to the legal team DIRECTLY giving them FULL EXAMPLES of WHY Mr. Programmer was in violation, and then let the Legal team do it's job!
What should happen here IMO? Mr. Manager/Engineer should be demoted for trying to overstep his boundaries, Mr. Programmer should be given his FAT JUICY REWARDS promised, since Mr. Manager/Engineer promised them BEFORE his team had done their job looking through the application, and Microsoft should FINALLY provide CLEAR and CONCISE information as to HOW this license has been breached and then should work with Mr. Programmer to see if there's ANYWAY to make the product work as it was intended, even for the FREE users without violation any licenses.
I think this whole situation could have been avoided if one fool Manager/Engineer hadn't shot off his mouth and tried to play BIG DOG.
This time I agree that Microsoft as a WHOLE isn't to blame, but a certain Manager/Engineer is!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Honestly, let's look at the WHOLE picture
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
labeling
abit like labeling anyone who disagrees with the war a pinko liberal.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Missing the point of value
This is why Microsoft is in the right. They compliment and encourage people to build these addons, but not for express; it has been that way for a long time. By keeping the newer features on only the full version, MS can afford to keep offering the Express edition and this developer doesn't understand that.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Are you from San Diego?
If you're not Marco from San Diego, sorry!
Jenna Smith
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Using free software to boost sales
The ability of his product to integrate with Visual Studio Express actually increases his potential market, as he is selling a product as well.
There's some pretty simple things that Microsoft can do to quell this; the simplest being to simply retire Express versions and remove them from future releases and existing downloads--screwing it for everyone. The second is to begin a cat-and-mouse game of disabling his ability to inject code into the Express process.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Rebuttals, and FOSS
In other words, it's against the law (Microsoft's law, rather than the elected legislature's, but apparently just as binding on people without them having signed anything) to work around a bug in this software? Nothing in the above limits its scope to a specific subset of "technical limitations", such as say those Microsoft deliberately introduced to cripple their trash software.
This alone is an excellent reason to use FOSS and ditch M$.
Of course, there's also that the whole economic premise is bogus. It is absolutely not the case that M$ could "no longer afford to provide the free Express version" if people started extending it, or competing with their fancier products, or whatever. Microsoft has more money than God and software has a marginal cost of reproduction of close to zero (yes, even fancy software does), so they could easily afford to provide all kinds of software (even free Vista for everybody -- gag) without noticeably dipping into their petty cash fund for Chrissake.
More significantly, the economics claimed would make the existence and continued development of Eclipse physically impossible. Obviously that's not the case, so the economic argument against freedom made by M$ is clearly pure baloney.
Eclipse, in case you're wondering, is the FOSS answer to Visual Studio .NET and its friends, and yes, you can not only get it free, you can also get JUnit and other -unit integration free. Take that, Microsloth!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
No hack
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: No hack
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: No Hack
[ link to this | view in chronology ]