This is an archived story posted by Frank Clegg. You can view the original here.

1. Since Microsoft, presumably, is simply encouraging the learning of ECMA standard C#, it should not matter whether the OS platform of the students is something other than Windows if another compliant C# platform exists and costs or other reasons U of W might have for using it make it attractive. Can Mr. Clegg assure U of W that Microsoft will not invalidate the agreement, or withdraw funding if C# is taught using Ximian Mono on Linux?
   
   

   The Microsoft Canada Co. sponsorship does require C# to be taught on a platform based on the Windows® operating system. The intent of this sponsorship program is to find areas of common interest between Microsoft and Canadian universities. In this case, University of Waterloo expressed an interest in incorporating the C# language into engineering curriculum. Microsoft’s interest is to expose students to our latest tools and our platform. Having said that, we believe a complete education involves providing students with access to a variety of operating systems and encourage all Canadian universities to expose students and faculty to as many tools and platforms as possible as this will create the most complete learning experience for the students.

2. Are there suitable C# compilers available for alternate operating systems, and will these be acceptable for student use in ECE 150? In particular, Linux and Mac OS X have a non-negligible user base from my observations among ECE students, so I am concerned that this change would shut students who use these operating systems.

   C# is an industry standard governed by ECMA. There are several developer groups currently working on C# implementations on other platforms. In the near future, students will have the option to compile C# code on a variety of platforms as those compilers become available.

3. It concerns me that Microsoft could be in the process of baiting people into using C# by claiming it is open and cross-platform, only to follow this up with patent claims against implementations that it does not agree with. Because the EU does not recognize software patents, one presumes that the ECMA does not consider this an issue. However, since software patents are accepted in the US, and currently (I believe) under review in Canada, this issue affects C# directly. Can you assure me that no patents required to reasonably implement a C# compiler will ever be enforced against C# implementations?

   With regard to the C# standard governed by ECMA (now known as ECMA-334), Microsoft has committed in a letter sent to ECMA that it will “grant on a non-discriminatory basis, to any party requesting it, licenses on reasonable terms and conditions, for its patent(s) deemed necessary for implementing the ECMA standard.” Microsoft has disclosed that it will not seek royalties for necessary patents to implement the ECMA C# standard (ECMA-334). Microsoft’s license grant is to be applied on a world-wide basis and not just within Europe.

4. From Microsoft's perspective, is this a package deal? If the university rejects part of it (specifically, if the addition of E&CE 050 is rejected by the University Senate, which I'm told is a possibility), would the rest of the agreement also be eliminated along with that?

   This is not a package deal. The research and education solutions components are not conditional on curriculum integration. In fact, each of the three initiatives being sponsored in this agreement was developed independently. To reinforce this fact, we have decided to physically separate curriculum from the other two initiatives in a separate contract. We will proceed with research and education solutions as planned, and let the outcome of the university’s curriculum approval process determine the outcome of the curriculum agreement.

   I think it’s important to stress that Microsoft Canada’s Academic Innovation Alliance funding was created in the spirit of encouraging innovation on Canadian university campuses. We hope to collaborate with each participating university to find common points of interest where we can work together. So if a university is interested in doing a curriculum project – as Waterloo is in this case -- that’s a great opportunity for us to work together. If they are not interested in developing curriculum based on our technologies, it is absolutely their decision and there are many, many other areas where we can and will work together with universities beyond technology curriculum.

5. Will this deal in any way prevent UW from making similar arrangements with other corporations? If so, in what scope? If not, what would prevent Sun (for example) from donating a few million next year to get E&CE 150 switched over to Java?

   This deal with not prevent UW from making similar arrangements with other corporations. Any decision to collaborate with other corporations, as it is my understanding has been done many times in the past, is entirely up to the University of Waterloo.

6. Your donation to the University of Waterloo in part funds curriculum development for ECE 050 and a curriculum change in ECE 150. As the curriculum change for ECE 150 did not require a change to course description it was not vetted through the Faculty Council or through the Senate Undergraduate Committee. This means that it affects the part of the curriculum usually understood to be the jurisdiction of the faculty member. Will Microsoft still provide UW with its donation if the professor for ECE 150 chooses to follow the course description without teaching C#? If it will not, how does Microsoft feel about compromising academic freedom at the university?

   Funding for this curriculum initiative was decided based on the university’s exploration of possibilities for sponsorship in the preparation of new curriculum material on C#. If the university decides not to teach C#, then there will not be a need to create any corresponding new material for which funding was initially allocated.

7. University of Waterloo, in the not so distant past, has had prolonged negotiations and arguments about intellectual property rights, patent rights and copyright issues that sprang from the its long history of innovation. Could you please inform the UW community about when innovations on this young C# programming language does occur, who will own that innovation? As a subsequent consequence, will those modifications be open to the public?

   The curriculum initiative being discussed concerns the teaching of the use of the C# programming language as a tool for course delivery and does not include a language research component. The current sponsorship has no effect on the ownership of IP as a result of C# programming language research.

8. When the new Tablet PC programming innovations occur, who will be the intellectual property rights as well as financial beneficiary of all that hard work done here on the Waterloo campus?

   It is Microsoft’s intention that IP ownership resulting from the Tablet PC research conducted at the University of Waterloo remains with the university. The details of this specific project are still under discussion.

9. When and how did the idea of including C# as a teaching language idea first come to you? In which direction was the initial approach about this idea (ie. did Microsoft suggest it first, or did UW suggest it first?)

   University of Waterloo Electrical & Computer Engineering faculty members approached Microsoft to discuss the possibilities of working together to integrate C# into its curriculum.

10. From my understanding this funding is to facilitate three projects, all of which will incorporate Microsoft technology. Is the cost of this Microsoft technology that will be provided part of the 2.3 million dollars quoted? If so, how much of the 2.3 million dollars quoted is actual cash for research? If the value of the Microsoft technology is included in the 2.3 million dollars, how was that value established, was the MSRP used?

    In fact, all the software used in each of the initiatives is obtained through UW’s membership in the MSDN® Academic Alliance which was donated to UW by Microsoft Research on July 1st 2002. The vast majority of the agreement is cash, with additional support in kind, in the form of consulting hours from our Microsoft Consulting Services group. Here’s how the funding breaks down:

    • Tablet PC Research: $758K (cash)
    • Online Learning: $490K (cash)
    • MCS Resource (Project Management): $500K (in kind)

    Concerning curriculum sponsorship, Microsoft intends to provide the university with $561K (cash) for the preparation of C# and distributed computing teaching material.