@ 14/05/2004 07:03 : wrote Raul Miller :
You are ignoring the _on_ _other_ _software_ part: "the IBM patent license terminates if you don't comply with conditions ON OTHER SOFTWARE". This is undoubtely contamination, and is prohibited by the DFSG#9On Fri, May 14, 2004 at 10:07:59AM +0100, MJ Ray wrote:"We insist that licenses be perpetual unless terminated for non-compliance" Branden Robinson during the LaTeX discussions http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2002/08/msg00108.html -- Now, the IBM patent licence terminates if you don't comply with conditions on other software. Why is that not contaminating?That's an example of terminating for non-compliance. An example of termination without non-compliance would be where a license is terminated after five years.
You lost me for this one. Who is suing IBM over patent license? (IMHO the person would have to be certifiably insane to do that, but...)Then why would suing IBM over patent license violations matter for free software?
holdLegalistic licensors covering all their bases, or companies thatso many patents that it would be difficult to search them all to determine what to license.It seems unfair to put the burden of discovering what has been licensed on the distributors and users. Does anyone know how a court would handle this?In the U.S., it's roughly the case that the defendant in patent litigation is presumed guilty until proven innocent.
?! -- br,M