[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: [fielding@apache.org: Review of proposed Apache License, version 2.0]



Scripsit Andrew Suffield <asuffield@debian.org>
> On Sun, Nov 09, 2003 at 02:55:56PM +1300, Adam Warner wrote:

> > No sane company will ever grant a perpetual, non-exclusive, worldwide,
> > fully paid-up and royalty free patent licence without a reciprocity
> > clause.

> No sane company will ever grant a perpetual, non-exclusive, worldwide,
> fully paid-up and royalty free copyright license without a reciprocity
> clause.

There's the difference that it takes explicit action and quite a bit
of money to acquire and keep holding a patent. Going through that
trouble just to grant the public a perpetual, non-exclusive,
worldwide, fully paid-up and royalty free patent licence without a
reciprocity clause would be senseless. An easier way to achieve the
same legal result would be not to take out a patent at all.

On the other hand, copyright springs into being automatically. It
makes sense for somebody who have accidentally become bestowed with a
copyright to explicitly license it to the general public under free
terms, if he wants to create a situation reminiscent of the one where
he does not have a copyright.

-- 
Henning Makholm                        "Nej, hvor er vi altså heldige! Længe
                                      leve vor Buxgører Sansibar Bastelvel!"



Reply to: