8 ms·

That's not correct. You don't have to give your credit card details or even be logged in but you are still required to have any Visual Studio license. For hobby

by foepys 7mo ago

That's not correct. You don't have to give your credit card details or even be logged in but you are still required to have any Visual Studio license. For hobbyists and startups the VS Community license is enough but larger companies need a VS Professional license even for the VS Build Tools. How strict Microsoft is with enforcement of this license is another story.

dgxyz 7mo ago
[flagged]
- okanat 7mo ago
  Well, let's say this is the world view of all companies about open-source software. Then what happens. If people "tend to not give crap" about licenses, all the nice guarantees of GPL etc also disappear.
  - scotty79 7mo ago
    There are zero guarantees and commercial software uses GPLd software as parts of their products all the time. Licenses do not work and you shouldn't respect them whenever you can.
  - cies 7mo ago
    Very weird comparison. GPL was made in response to restrictive commercial licensing. Yes is uses the same legal document (a license): but is made in response! So is propriety seizes to exist, then it's not a problem GPL also seizes to exist. Also: it's quite obvious to me that IP-law nowadays too much. It may have been a good idea at first, but now it's a monster (and people seem to die because of it: Aaron Swartz and Suchir Balaji come to mind).
anankaie 7mo ago
You do not need a Professional or Enterprise license to use the Visual Studio Build Tools: > Previously, if the application you were developing was not OSS, installing VSBT was permitted only if you had a valid Visual Studio license (e.g., Visual Studio Community or higher). From (https://devblogs.microsoft.com/cppblog/updates-to-visual-studio-build-tools-license-for-c-and-cpp-open-source-projects/ https://devblogs.microsoft.com/cppblog/updates-to-visual-stu...). For OSS, you do not even need a Community License anymore.
- WatchDog 7mo ago
  The license doesn't actually permit OSS development. Only compilation of near-unmodified third party OSS libraries. You may not compile OSS software developed by your own organisation. The OSS software must be unmodified, "except, and only to the extent, minor modifications are necessary so that the Open Source Dependencies can be compiled and built with the software." https://visualstudio.microsoft.com/license-terms/vs2026-ga-diagnostic-buildtools/ https://visualstudio.microsoft.com/license-terms/vs2026-ga-d...
  - dwattttt 7mo ago
    Using VS build tools for open source development is covered by the Community licence [0], separate from this Build Tools licence change. That license is more open than you might expect, working as an individual it even permits proprietary development for commercial purposes. Under that usage, the Community license counts as a valid Visual Studio license for Build Tools purposes, hence the second paragraph: > This change expands user rights to the Build Tools and does not limit the existing Visual Studio Community license provisions around Open-Source development. If you already are a developer contributing to OSS projects, you can continue to use Visual Studio and Visual Studio Build Tools together for free, just like before. [0] https://visualstudio.microsoft.com/license-terms/vs2022-ga-community/ https://visualstudio.microsoft.com/license-terms/vs2022-ga-c...
- dwattttt 7mo ago
  This does not apply if you're developing closed source: > if you and your team need to compile and develop proprietary C++ code with Visual Studio, a Visual Studio license will still be required.
  - irishcoffee 7mo ago
    Is the fancy text editor compiling, or the toolchain? I don’t need visual to write, read, compile, or link any code using the toolchain.
  - quietbritishjim 7mo ago
qingcharles 7mo ago
And a VS license isn't too expensive if you really want to buy one. Stack Social have legit licenses discounted to $15: https://www.stacksocial.com/sales/microsoft-visual-studio-professional-2022-3 https://www.stacksocial.com/sales/microsoft-visual-studio-pr...
- eps 7mo ago
  This definetly looks like some sort of scam. Like a volume key license being resold against EULA or some such.
  - aleph_minus_one 7mo ago
    > Like a volume key license being resold against EULA or some such. At least in the EU, this is legal.
    - eps 7mo ago
      Through which means?
      - aleph_minus_one 7mo ago
        I can only provide articles that are in German: An article about court decision by the EuGH from 2012: https://www.heise.de/hintergrund/EuGH-Gebrauchte-Softwarelizenzen-duerfen-weiterverkauft-werden-1631066.html https://www.heise.de/hintergrund/EuGH-Gebrauchte-Softwareliz... Another court decision from the BGH (the highest German civil court) from 2014 that builds on this EuGH decision: https://www.heise.de/news/BGH-begruendet-Rechtmaessigkeit-des-Gebrauchtsoftware-Handels-2104055.html https://www.heise.de/news/BGH-begruendet-Rechtmaessigkeit-de...

by foepys 7mo ago

dgxyz 7mo ago

[flagged]

okanat 7mo ago
Well, let's say this is the world view of all companies about open-source software. Then what happens. If people "tend to not give crap" about licenses, all the nice guarantees of GPL etc also disappear.
- scotty79 7mo ago
  There are zero guarantees and commercial software uses GPLd software as parts of their products all the time. Licenses do not work and you shouldn't respect them whenever you can.
- cies 7mo ago
  Very weird comparison. GPL was made in response to restrictive commercial licensing. Yes is uses the same legal document (a license): but is made in response! So is propriety seizes to exist, then it's not a problem GPL also seizes to exist. Also: it's quite obvious to me that IP-law nowadays too much. It may have been a good idea at first, but now it's a monster (and people seem to die because of it: Aaron Swartz and Suchir Balaji come to mind).

anankaie 7mo ago

You do not need a Professional or Enterprise license to use the Visual Studio Build Tools: > Previously, if the application you were developing was not OSS, installing VSBT was permitted only if you had a valid Visual Studio license (e.g., Visual Studio Community or higher). From (https://devblogs.microsoft.com/cppblog/updates-to-visual-studio-build-tools-license-for-c-and-cpp-open-source-projects/ https://devblogs.microsoft.com/cppblog/updates-to-visual-stu...). For OSS, you do not even need a Community License anymore.

WatchDog 7mo ago
The license doesn't actually permit OSS development. Only compilation of near-unmodified third party OSS libraries. You may not compile OSS software developed by your own organisation. The OSS software must be unmodified, "except, and only to the extent, minor modifications are necessary so that the Open Source Dependencies can be compiled and built with the software." https://visualstudio.microsoft.com/license-terms/vs2026-ga-diagnostic-buildtools/ https://visualstudio.microsoft.com/license-terms/vs2026-ga-d...
- dwattttt 7mo ago
  Using VS build tools for open source development is covered by the Community licence [0], separate from this Build Tools licence change. That license is more open than you might expect, working as an individual it even permits proprietary development for commercial purposes. Under that usage, the Community license counts as a valid Visual Studio license for Build Tools purposes, hence the second paragraph: > This change expands user rights to the Build Tools and does not limit the existing Visual Studio Community license provisions around Open-Source development. If you already are a developer contributing to OSS projects, you can continue to use Visual Studio and Visual Studio Build Tools together for free, just like before. [0] https://visualstudio.microsoft.com/license-terms/vs2022-ga-community/ https://visualstudio.microsoft.com/license-terms/vs2022-ga-c...
dwattttt 7mo ago
This does not apply if you're developing closed source: > if you and your team need to compile and develop proprietary C++ code with Visual Studio, a Visual Studio license will still be required.
- irishcoffee 7mo ago
  Is the fancy text editor compiling, or the toolchain? I don’t need visual to write, read, compile, or link any code using the toolchain.
- quietbritishjim 7mo ago

qingcharles 7mo ago

And a VS license isn't too expensive if you really want to buy one. Stack Social have legit licenses discounted to $15: https://www.stacksocial.com/sales/microsoft-visual-studio-professional-2022-3 https://www.stacksocial.com/sales/microsoft-visual-studio-pr...

eps 7mo ago
This definetly looks like some sort of scam. Like a volume key license being resold against EULA or some such.
- aleph_minus_one 7mo ago
  > Like a volume key license being resold against EULA or some such. At least in the EU, this is legal.
  - eps 7mo ago
    Through which means?
    - aleph_minus_one 7mo ago
      I can only provide articles that are in German: An article about court decision by the EuGH from 2012: https://www.heise.de/hintergrund/EuGH-Gebrauchte-Softwarelizenzen-duerfen-weiterverkauft-werden-1631066.html https://www.heise.de/hintergrund/EuGH-Gebrauchte-Softwareliz... Another court decision from the BGH (the highest German civil court) from 2014 that builds on this EuGH decision: https://www.heise.de/news/BGH-begruendet-Rechtmaessigkeit-des-Gebrauchtsoftware-Handels-2104055.html https://www.heise.de/news/BGH-begruendet-Rechtmaessigkeit-de...