Re: Choice of venue, was: GUADEC report
Matthew Palmer <mpalmer@debian.org> wrote:
>On Wed, Jul 14, 2004 at 11:54:03AM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
>> Branden Robinson <branden@debian.org> wrote:
>> >Termination due to non-compliance is one thing.
>> >
>> >Termination due to the copyright holder's, e.g., bad case of gas, is quite
>> >another.
>>
>> Which of these are patent infringement allegations closer to?
>
>Termination due to non-compliance.
How so? Many patents seem entirely arbitrary, and nobody spends an
extensive period of time making sure that there's no possibility of
infringement. The owner of the patent is under no obligation to allege
infringement until they feel like it.
Termination due to non-compliance means that you've been insufficiently
careful in following the license, but patent infringement allegations
are effectively impossible to avoid. In that respect they're far closer
to upstream terminating your license.
--
Matthew Garrett | mjg59-chiark.mail.debian.legal@srcf.ucam.org
Reply to: