We're on a conference call right now with Bob Muglia (senior VP of server business) and Brad Smith (general counsel) among others, who are talking about the announcement that we posted as a news story half an hour ago. One message coming through loud and clear is that they are sitll making a very clear difference between non-commercial software and commercial software, which means that companies selling open source software in the way that Novell does, for instance, will still need to buy patent licences to protect themselves from litigation.

Bob Muglia: "Just as we did when we hammered out our compliance, there is aclear difference between people who are developing OS software ad engaging in non-commercial distribution, and those engaged in commercial distribution."

"The basic analysis is," added Brad Smith, "that we have valuable intellectual property in our patents. We will continue to view that as valuable IP, and will continue to commercialise that from all users. We also have some trade secret information that we still value but which we will make free of charge. We are opening up but at the same time we will retain the value in our IP."

Smith also indicated there will be more to come: "We have always said in the past that any step would not be the last step we would ever take. Ths has been a continuing evolution."

Perhaps the most interesting quote I picked out among the noise and the news that the European Commission is not terribly impressed is that "The difference this time is that we're backing it up with actions." The 30,000 pages of documentationp promised today, together with more details of the deal, are posted on Microsoft's website here.