I was going over an old Groklaw posting that got me thinking about Microsoft and it’s .NET Agenda. I decided to do more research and took a look at the Comes vs Microsoft documents again but from the perspective of the current Mono issues. I am even more convinced that Mono and Moonlight do nothing but help Microsoft win against competing platforms.

In the same vein, if Novell and Microsoft call it "Microsoft Moonlight", does it make Moonlight developers de facto Microsoft employees?

Moonlight hype comes from Microsoft's direction, as usual

A new story of migration to Microsoft (due to Apple's reliance on Microsoft) offers an important lesson about the purpose of Novell's Mono and Moonlight

More disturbing details about Moonlight are unleashed

Timely perspective on Apple, Microsoft, and the substitution of "Linux" with Android (Google's trademark)

Moonlight’s cold reception was mentioned briefly just a couple of days ago, but let’s emphasise again why GNU/Linux users must not accept it; instead, they need to complaint or protest against Webmasters that adopt such ActiveX-like embrace & extend strategies. Don’t let Microsoft journalists lie to developers by saying that there is “Silverlight for Linux” because there isn’t.

People who focus on minor issues are greatly exercized about the purchase of Skype by Microsoft. How will this affect the success of Skype's spyware, they ask? Was it good strategy for one or the other? Did Microsoft pay too much? How does this affect the possible success of this or that other company?

I noticed a comment thread on Groklaw about Moonlight, with a link to the license terms on Microsoft's website. They call it Covenant to Downstream Recipients of Moonlight - Microsoft & Novell Interoperability Collaboration . A comment by Microsoft's Brian Goldfarb on Dana Blankenhorn's article about Novell being a lead pony for Silverlight started the discussion originally.