SCOPE OF LICENSE. The software is licensed, not sold. This agreement only gives you some rights to use the software. Microsoft reserves all other rights. For clarification Microsoft, or its licensors, retains ownership of all aspects of the software. Unless applicable law gives you more rights despite this limitation, you may use the software only as expressly permitted in this agreement. In doing so, you must comply with any technical limitations in the software that only allow you to use it in certain ways. For example, if Microsoft technically limits or disables extensibility for the software, you may not extend the software by, among other things, loading or injecting into the software any non-Microsoft add-ins, macros, or packages; modifying the software registry settings; or adding features or functionality equivalent to that found in Microsoft products and services. You may not: a) work around any technical limitations in the software that only allow you to use it in certain ways; b) reverse engineer, decompile or disassemble the software, or otherwise attempt to derive the source code for the software, except and to the extent required by third party licensing terms governing use of certain open source components that may be included in the software; c) remove, minimize, block, or modify any notices of Microsoft or its suppliers in the software; d) use the software in any way that is against the law or to create or propagate malware; or e) share, publish, distribute, or lease the software (except for any distributable code, subject to the terms above), provide the software as a stand-alone offering for others to use, or transfer the software or this agreement to any third party.
It also plays into [Microsoft’s] goal to make VS Code seem open source while being the opposite! A lot of the functionality is in the marketplace but non Microsoft products aren’t legally allowed to use it and you’re not allowed to distribute builds of the plugins.
My use of “their” may have been too ambiguous. I thought it was clear from the context that I was talking about Microsoft’s program, marketplace, and plugins specifically. When you use VS Code with things like C it’s like “hey, download this extension!” So from your perspective that’s a thing VS Code can do, because it’s so seamless and easy to add in. But what you don’t realize is that you’re downloading a proprietary, closed source extension. When you use VS Codium you can’t (easily) get those extensions (without breaking Microsoft’s terms of service). It’s the same shit that Oracle pulls with their JDK distribution and a big part of why OpenJDK usage is much more common post 2019ish.
Yes, hence why I commented that MS never prohibits you from publishing your extension elsewhere. Nor does MS forbid you from using other marketplaces when using their product. It’s like saying valve is prohibiting game dev from publishing their game elsewhere or distributing their game outside of steam. It’s just not true. And MS has all the right to limit their marketplace to their own client too. After all, it is first and foremost, their service for their product specifically. It’s like you’re making an unofficial client for youtube.
I never said MS is doing any of those things. I even linked their TOS to show you very clearly what they’re doing and not doing.
And MS has all the right to limit their marketplace to their own client too. After all, it is first and foremost, their service for their product specifically. It’s like you’re making an unofficial client for youtube.
I never said they shouldn’t “have the right”, I said they’re open-washing. They act like VS Code is open source but the build they distribute is not and a lot of the functionality they add in through recommended plugins are both not open source and you’re not allowed to easily download them from other plugins. Everything about VS Code is fauxpen source to the max.
I never have a problem with your follow up, even if you still did not specify your intention explicitly. At least the ToS is for a plugin that is owned by MS so it provides a clue to what you’re referring to. I have a problem with your original statement.
… A lot of the functionality is in the marketplace but non Microsoft products aren’t legally allowed to use it and you’re not allowed to distribute builds of the plugins.
To put differently:
A lot of the functionality is in the marketplace. Non MS products aren’t legally allowed to use it (1). You’re not allowed to distribute builds of the plugin(s) (2).
See the problem? That statement with the follow up is accusing MS restricting your right to use MS marketplace from non MS product as a problem (1), and THEN accusing that you cannot distribute the build of the plugins from said marketplace (2) which is only true for MS owned plugins.
My point is, clear up your mistakes in communication. It doesn’t help anyone to spread misinformation. I hate MS as the linux guy next door, but making false accusations, intentionally or not, will make people stay away from you. Because as I stated, I immediately understand the context just from you sending ToS of a plugin owned by MS. But your accusation is different entirely than your intention.
No. If you’re using something other than Visual Studio Code you have to manually download plugins and the MS specific ones use licenses like this.
https://marketplace.visualstudio.com/items/ms-vscode.cpptools/license
Look at the usages of “In-Scope Products and Services” in Visual Studio Marketplace’s Terms of Service. https://cdn.vsassets.io/v/M253_20250303.9/_content/Microsoft-Visual-Studio-Marketplace-Terms-of-Use.pdf
Then specify MS plugins. If you only said plugins on MS marketplace, you are blaming MS for things they didn’t do
My use of “their” may have been too ambiguous. I thought it was clear from the context that I was talking about Microsoft’s program, marketplace, and plugins specifically. When you use VS Code with things like C it’s like “hey, download this extension!” So from your perspective that’s a thing VS Code can do, because it’s so seamless and easy to add in. But what you don’t realize is that you’re downloading a proprietary, closed source extension. When you use VS Codium you can’t (easily) get those extensions (without breaking Microsoft’s terms of service). It’s the same shit that Oracle pulls with their JDK distribution and a big part of why OpenJDK usage is much more common post 2019ish.
Yes, hence why I commented that MS never prohibits you from publishing your extension elsewhere. Nor does MS forbid you from using other marketplaces when using their product. It’s like saying valve is prohibiting game dev from publishing their game elsewhere or distributing their game outside of steam. It’s just not true. And MS has all the right to limit their marketplace to their own client too. After all, it is first and foremost, their service for their product specifically. It’s like you’re making an unofficial client for youtube.
I never said MS is doing any of those things. I even linked their TOS to show you very clearly what they’re doing and not doing.
I never said they shouldn’t “have the right”, I said they’re open-washing. They act like VS Code is open source but the build they distribute is not and a lot of the functionality they add in through recommended plugins are both not open source and you’re not allowed to easily download them from other plugins. Everything about VS Code is fauxpen source to the max.
I never have a problem with your follow up, even if you still did not specify your intention explicitly. At least the ToS is for a plugin that is owned by MS so it provides a clue to what you’re referring to. I have a problem with your original statement.
To put differently:
A lot of the functionality is in the marketplace. Non MS products aren’t legally allowed to use it (1). You’re not allowed to distribute builds of the plugin(s) (2).
See the problem? That statement with the follow up is accusing MS restricting your right to use MS marketplace from non MS product as a problem (1), and THEN accusing that you cannot distribute the build of the plugins from said marketplace (2) which is only true for MS owned plugins.
Well you understand me now, right? So what’s your point?
My point is, clear up your mistakes in communication. It doesn’t help anyone to spread misinformation. I hate MS as the linux guy next door, but making false accusations, intentionally or not, will make people stay away from you. Because as I stated, I immediately understand the context just from you sending ToS of a plugin owned by MS. But your accusation is different entirely than your intention.
deleted by creator