[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
patents."

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.

--
MJR/slef
My Opinion Only and possibly not of any group I know.
http://mjr.towers.org.uk/
http://www.ttllp.co.uk/ for creative copyleft computing



Reply to: