News 

Responding to a Microsoft statement from July which distanced the company GPLv3 compliance, the FSF claims that it will "ensure that Microsoft respects our copyrights and complies with our licenses".

"Microsoft cannot declare itself exempt from the requirements of GPLv3," the FSF claims in a statement.

Microsoft's statement insists that the company has no obligations under GPLv3. "Microsoft is not a party to the GPLv3 licence and none of its actions are to be misinterpreted as accepting status as a contracting party of GPLv3 or assuming any legal obligations under such licence," it says.

The

Microsoft insists that it does not need a licence under GPL "to carry out any aspect of its collaboration with Novell... even if Novell chooses to distribute GPLv3 code in the future".

The FSF disagrees. "We do not agree with Microsoft's characterisation of the situation involving GPLv3," it says. "Microsoft cannot by any act of anticipatory repudiation divest itself of its obligation to respect others' copyrights.

"If Microsoft distributes our works licensed under GPLv3, or pays others to distribute them on its behalf, it is bound to do so under the terms of that licence. It may not do so under any other terms; it cannot declare itself exempt from the requirements of GPLv3."

It then implies that it is prepared to take legal action if necessary. "Microsoft has said that it expects respect for its so-called 'intellectual property' - a propaganda term designed to confuse patent law with copyright and other unrelated laws, and to muddy the different issues they raise," it says. "We will ensure - and, to the extent of our resources, assist other GPLv3 licensors in ensuring - that Microsoft respects our copyrights and complies with our licences."