Re: Postfix
I'll pass on this and other email. It is my understanding that the
intention was for IBM to help, not to destroy.
The PKIX software that was released around the same time didn't
have a termination clause. See:
http://web.mit.edu/pfl/jonah-license.html
This is a very similar license otherwise.
We could go either for the PKIX license or for a clarification on
the Postfix one.
Wietse
john@dhh.gt.org:
> > But I'm not sure I understand the problem.
>
> Corporate policies change. IBM may decide next year that Postfix is of no
> further interest. Then when they receive a claim that it infringes
> someone's IP they might decide that invoking the revocation clause is the
> least expensive way to deal with it even though it is of questionable
> validity.
>
> > I will have to ask if partial license revocation is possible.
>
> That won't help.
>
> Try this:
>
> In the event a judgement is issued against IBM ruling that IBM is
> infringing a copyright or patent by distributing the Software and the
> judgement is such that your continued use or distribution of the Software
> would result in harm to IBM, you agree, upon notice to you, to either
>
> a) Permit IBM to enable you to continue to use the Software, or to modify
> it, or replace it with software that is at least functionally
> equivalent. If IBM determines that none of these alternatives is
> reasonably available, you agree, at IBM's request, to discontinue
> further distribution of the Software and to destroy all copies of the
> Software you possess.
>
> or
>
> b) Enter into an agreement with the owner of the infringed copyright or
> patent granting you the right to continue to use and/or distribute the
> Software.
>
> The notice provided by IBM shall describe the infringement in detail and
> shall include complete contact information for the owner of the copyright
> or patent. This is IBM's entire obligation to you regarding any claim of
> infringement.
> --
> John Hasler
> john@dhh.gt.org (John Hasler)
> Dancing Horse Hill
> Elmwood, WI
>
>
Reply to: