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

Re: IBM Public License (again)

On 2004-05-13 03:29:35 +0100 Josh Triplett <josh.trip@verizon.net> wrote:

MJ Ray wrote:
To me, it seems clearly non-free because it terminates if there is
legal action against IBM about patents "applicable to" some other
software. [...]
[...] This has the effect of a patent
cross-license: "Don't sue us over patents and we won't sue you over

I think your characterisation is a bit off. Doesn't it have the effect: "We license you these patents as long as you don't sue us over any software patents (even if we sue you over other software patents)."

The only circumstance under which the _copyright_ license
terminates is if you sue claiming that _the program itself_ violates
your software patent. This seems perfectly reasonable, and I personally
believe this license is a Free Software license.

I'm not taking issue with the copyright licence now. The copyright termination aspect seems slightly questionable, cross-contaminated by the patent aspects, but I know I need to think about that some more.

[...] When you sue
someone over the software, you are trying to stop people [...]

I'm not taking issue about suing over the covered software, but over some other unrelated software. That should not affect the licence of the covered software AFAICT.

My Opinion Only and possibly not of any group I know.
http://www.ttllp.co.uk/ for creative copyleft computing

Reply to: