Re: Some questions
Scripsit "Bernhard R. Link" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
>| Termination Upon Assertion of Patent Infringement. If you initiate
>| litigation by asserting a patent infringement claim ... alleging
>| that Licensed Product ... infringes any patent, then any and all
>| rights ... shall terminate.
I think common practise her on debian-legal is to tolerate such
clauses, based on the reasoning that it only harms people who try
to use a software patent to take away the software's freedom.
> I do not understand court-english very well, but I understand as if you
> were able to discriminate against patent-holders by putting some code,
> infringing some patent they have, in the product, so that thay can no
> longer use it.
You may have a point there. Of course the patent owner can keep his
rights simply by not suing the author, but that would be beside the
point if we really want to protect software patenteers against
The question is now whether a software patenteer is morally entitled
to the same kind of protection as businessmen or genetic researchers.
It might be argued that the entire concept of software patents is
an enemy of free software, and that free software must be allowed
to protect itself against it. I'd be inclined to agree with that.
But it might also be argued that making exceptions even for software
patenteers and child pornographers is a slippery slope which we should
stay away from.
Henning Makholm "I, madam, am the Archchancellor!
And I happen to run this University!"
- Some questions
- From: "Bernhard R. Link" <email@example.com>