[ros-kernel] Re: Tainted code in User32?

Royce Mitchell III royce3 at ev1.net
Sun May 30 23:10:08 CEST 2004

Dmitry Timoshkov wrote:

>IANAL, but the quoted above approach is certainly valid if you are developing
>a driver targeted for an MS OS, since it's the clear case of interoperability
>requirement. But when you are developing a clone OS it's completely illegal.
>And please take it as such.
Okay, now we're getting somewhere :)

To clarify a bit, we are not actually developing a clone of anything.

ReactOS's goals are:

1) win32 api compatibility - we want software written for Windows to 
work on ReactOS - bar none if possible.

2) NT-platform driver compatibility - we want drivers written for the 
NT-family of operating systems to work on ReactOS.

Now, some of our members add to those goals, but these two are the 
stated goals of ReactOS. We are not actually trying to develop a 
"clone". There are some things about MS's OSes that clearly nobody on 
this team likes, and will not be reproduced. There are also features we 
have planned that do not exist in any MS OS.

All that being said, I have a question for you:

I realize you are not a lawyer, but could you clarify on exactly how 
what we are doing is illegal, to the best of your knowledge? Does my 
clarifications here in this e-mail change that picture at all? I can't 
clarify enough, it is NOBODY's goal here at ReactOS to "clone" any 
Microsoft OS.


More information about the Ros-kernel mailing list