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

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

Andrew Suffield said:
> Finally, it is totally unacceptable to tie this into a software
> copyright license, such that accepting the license affects the status
> of your own patents. That's non-free however you look at it.

This made me think of an analogy:

Here's a bit from a hypothetical software license:
   In addition, by using this software, you grant to the Original Author a
non-exclusive right to use, modify, and/or distribute any work of which you
own copyright, for as long as you use or distribute The Program.

Clearly, no one would argue that this license is a Free Software license.
It requires a significant cost (all of your copyrights) to use the software.

However, this is essentially what the reciprocal patent clause is requiring.
 As part of the Apache license, you must agree not to sue any contributor
for any of your software patents, for as long as you continue to use Apache.
 If you do, then all of your Apache use is unlicensed.


Reply to: