Re: OSD && DFSG convergence
John Goerzen writes:
> In a nutshell, you are handing over rights to all your patents to
> Apple if you use the software, but the license is quite explicit
> that Apple is not handing over rights to all their patents in
> exchange.
I don't think it's the best defense against patents, but it's *a*
defense that helps the community. A better defense is that taken by
the OSL and AFL: if you sue any developer claiming that the software
violates one of your patents, you lose the right to use ALL software
licensed under the OSL, AFL, and any other license with a similar
clause.
> If Better Mice Inc sues Apple over their plastic molding patent violation,
> then that party is restricted from selling or giving away the software.
>
> Further, a case could be made that it violates clase 5 ("No discrimination
> against persons or groups") because it discriminates against people whom
> choose to file legal cases against Apple.
Sorry, but that's the Constitution's commerce clause all over again.
Once you start using that clause that way, the DFSG may as well say
"Ugh".
> The Real license not only has that restriction, but talks at length
> about R&D use only, etc, etc. It fails that clause in many ways.
Take out the R&D and personal use grants. Does it still comply with
the DFSG? Now add them back. How is it possible for more freedom to
make the software DFSG-nonfree?
--
-russ nelson http://russnelson.com | You get prosperity when
Crynwr sells support for free software | PGPok | the government does less,
521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315 268 1925 voice | not when the government
Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | +1 315 268 9201 FAX | does something right.
Reply to: