Why not GPL it? You stated the answer to that question earlier. It's a trap for open source developers. They're attempting to confuse people on what open source is, and then capitalize on it(read: sue) when any code derived from it goes into a real open source project. Everybody who truly gets what open source is(except Novell, who is the only one explicitly "exempt" according to MS) will avoid .NET like the plague, and use something quite better, like Python, Ruby or even Java.

See the following new article from SJVN:

http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,2191754,00.asp

Does that finally show everyone why Mono isn't such a great idea? Does it teach us just why Novell, which fosters this project and makes its desktop more Mono-oriented, doing it for selfish interests? Only Novell is 'protected' for the use of Mono (this will last for another 4 years and then who knows what...); even Xandros and Linspire are not protected (excluded explicitly in their deal with Microsoft).

Microsoft is fooling everyone and works with Novell on poisoning the well we all drink from.

Does it not also mean any patents held elsewhere and made it 'accidentally' into the .Net libraries are open to question?

I don't see how patents would be a problem. As long as you are implementing the same features in the same way as Microsoft, you have the possibility of a patent lawsuit. The real problem is with copyright infringement.

The idiot above (initials RS) needs to read GPLv2. Novell does not have the right to use Microsoft's patents. Otherwise they would be violating the GPL. Their customers cannot be sued for patent violations.

This is a question of being able to get copyrighted MS code into Mono. That would not benefit Novell or anyone else. It could (possibly though not likely) lead someone to get an idea for implementation and cause patent problems, and that would not help Novell in any way.

There is a very telling section about mono and patents in Wikipedia at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mono_(software).

Essentially Microsoft put forward parts of .Net to EMCA for certification for the appearance of being a friendly company but then yanks back on patented parts of the framework such as ado.Net, asp.Net and winforms. As a .net developer, it's pretty difficult not to use ADO.Net and ASP.Net when writing an application, making it effectively impossible to create a truly multi-platform application.

This Reference License crap is yet another smoke and mirrors ploy by the Evil Empire to blur the lines and create some good will where there should be none. If a platform is robust, stable and well documented, who gives a rats ass how it works under the covers? Definitely not the majority of developers that write business/web apps(IMHO).