If you plan on contributing to the Mono project, don't look at the source. If you are a in a large organisation with lots of money, don't look at the code. Otherwise fill yer boots.

This is negative alarmist bull crap.

He starts out the post by saying, "use reflector only when you really have to. Using it is technically breaking the EULA."

He then goes on to describe another unrealistic situation: you saw some code, you implemented something similar, then Microsoft sues you.

While it may be technically true that if you copy something Microsoft has a patent on that they might sue you for copy infringement.

But let's be practical here -- has Microsoft ever sued anyone for breaking the EULA by using Reflector? Come on.
Likewise, MS isn't going to sue if you create a class that looks a lot like the patented XYZ class.

Microsoft uses their patent portfolio defensively. They're not gonna come knocking on your door out of the blue and sue you for a class that looks something like theirs. Jeez.

Who's going to be the first to test those waters with a commercial product?

More FUD...

Some other link that talk about the problems of open source whit that

@JudahGabriel

"But let's be practical here -- has Microsoft ever sued anyone for breaking the EULA by using Reflector? Come on.
Likewise, MS isn't going to sue if you create a class that looks a lot like the patented XYZ class."

You must be kidding did you read the history of TestDriven.NET ???

Microsoft is killing that project, sued the creator for use "reverse engineer" (aka reflector)

http://weblogs.asp.net/nunitaddin/archive/2007/07/06/microsoft-amp-testdriven-net.aspx

Tha patents of the Ribbon are a joke too, MS come to an agreement with Novel before sue them and Balmer said all the time that Linux is evil and break all her patents !!!

That's the real world, of course that some things are good, but have a lot of consequences, as an Open Source developer, and I feel that is not good at all, every one said that would be great to step into ASP.NET code, thanks to God I don't use ASP.NET for web development and for beginners will be really a pain neck to step into that code, jumping from one method to other.

Lets be real, this is useful for advance developers, the beginners will not learn too much from the code, like Frans said, for the companies is better to buy a book to them instead of the productive hours that them will waste watching the MS code.

@w3stfa11

Why do you think that we are creating FUD ??

We are simple developers, Frans depends on .NET for their work, this is about to don't believe anything that MS said and don't forget the last legal actions of MS.

Best Regards

The example of what's happened to TestDriven.NET isn't the same as the nightmare example described in this article. With TestDriven.NET, he figured out a way to enable plugin in Visual Studio Express, and in the EULA is states that you can't use plugins with the product. He didn't copy code from the framework itself to do anything, so it's completely different. Your point is still true, Microsoft does sue in certain cases.

When I started learning how to program I learned by reading code I couldn't read. I played around with it and figure out what stuff does. This was back in the day with QBasic and VB3; I was about 16 and couldn't afford any books and code was free for the peeking. Most books are really dissappointing and only cover about 1% of the technology on the surface; not to mention the fact that there are alot of bad practices shown in books. Also, to really get down and dirty it'll really help to look at the actual code of the framework. I've been using .NET Reflector for years to do this. Any code that just works and does well what it's made to do is worth looking at.

Some of us learn best from reading other peoples code, and in my case that's how it's always been from the beginning. If you don't learn well from reading others code, then just don't look at the code for the Framework and STOP complaining about it being available.

@crpietschmann

About the TestDriven.net problem if you look at these mails

http://www.mutantdesign.co.uk/downloads/ExpressEmails1.html

Jamie's Mail:

..."Is there any chance you could let me know which specific clause in the
licence I was contravening? "...

Jason Weber's mail:

..."Since I'm not a lawyer I shouldn't comment on the license. However if
you read the Express SKU EULA you'll see verbiage around REVERSE ENGINEERING,"...

About to learn from the code, there is today wonderful FREE places to learn from code: CodeProject SourceForge CodePlex all the MONO implementation, ie. I learn with QBasic and VB3 like you =) what a funny days, but I didn't have Internet at that time...at least here in Argentina LoL

Ok ok I will stop to talk, maybe it is better for all, to let MS decide from us at any time and for anything. Is funny to see (and I'm not talking about u) that is saying that this is great, later said: why NDoc developer quit, or why NAnt takes too long for .NET 2.0 support, like some in the Frans's post said, maybe WE the .NET are the ones that don't get the OSS idea. I was a lot of time trying to be constructive with MS, I post a lot of suggestions to help open source projects in MS blogs or things like availability of fixes, but when I see something bad I try to said it loud to let others think in the other side.

I said all this as OpenSource developer. I used spend hundred and hundred of hours of my life for the community so I have the right to said that.

Best Regards
Marcos
www.filehelpers.com