Microsoft is releasing its .Net Framework libraries under the Microsoft Reference License, which allows viewing of source code but not modification or redistribution. Despite my chronic proclamations of conspiracy theories, this whole thing seems like a bad idea. Basically, you tacitly agree to the license and then get to see the code. What happens when something patented or copyright from the MS frameworks make Microsoft is releasing its .Net Framework libraries under the Microsoft Reference License, which allows viewing of source code but not modification or redistribution. Despite my chronic proclamations of conspiracy theories, this whole thing seems like a bad idea. Basically, you tacitly agree to the license and then get to see the code. What happens when something patented or copyright from the MS frameworks make their way into other products (probably accidentally but a huge amount of software is based on the same design patterns.) Does Microsoft agree to not sue? Nope. It would seem wise to avoid anything released under this half-baked Microsoft Reference License. Why wouldn’t Microsoft want developers to use the libraries anyway? Why not just GPL it? For that matter, why not Apache the libraries. Open Source