Re: RPSL and DFSG-compliance
[Rob: I'm going to keep you Cc:'ed since I think you're not subscribed
to -legal, but in the future, please set MFT if you want to be
Cc:'ed.]
To allow for the most efficient repeat of history, almost all of these
issues have been dealt with before:
http://people.debian.org/~terpstra/message/20030210.014921.9582508e.html
http://people.debian.org/~terpstra/message/20020722.233251.00239a7b.html
On Mon, 26 Jul 2004, Rob Lanphier wrote:
> what we're trying to accomplish with the patent clause is this:
> we're giving a license to our patents (and our copyright) in
> exchange for not being sued by the licensee over patent infringment.
> Note that this isn't a license to the licensee's patents. This just
> basically says that we can revoke our patent grants if the licensee
> chooses to take legal action against us.
The problem is that such a clause becomes an effective license to the
licensee's patents.
11.1 Term and Termination. The term of this License is perpetual
unless terminated as provided below. This License and the rights
granted hereunder will terminate:
(c) automatically without notice from Licensor if You, at any time
during the term of this License, commence an action for patent
infringement against Licensor (including by cross-claim or counter
claim in a lawsuit);
This means that if Real sues me for patent infringement on an
unrelated patent, and I counter claim patent infringement on my still
unrelated patents, then they automatically revoke my license to any
covered patent, even if those happen to be critical to my business.
And I didn't even bring the action against Real in the first place!
A slightly more appropriate patent clause is the one that is present
in the current version of the Apache Source License v2.0. [The
original version was similar to the RPSL, but ASF saw the light, so to
speak, and changed it to something that is (IMO) DFSG Free.]
If You institute patent litigation against any entity (including a
cross-claim or counterclaim in a lawsuit) alleging that the Work or
a Contribution incorporated within the Work constitutes direct or
contributory patent infringement, then any patent licenses granted
to You under this License for that Work shall terminate as of the
date such litigation is filed.[1]
Note that this only terminates the patent rights if you claim that the
work constitutes direct or contributory patent infringment... which
effectively uses the patents covered within the work to protect the
freeness of the work itself.
Don Armstrong
1: ASLv2 §3 http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
--
If I had a letter, sealed it in a locked vault and hid the vault
somewhere in New York. Then told you to read the letter, thats not
security, thats obscurity. If I made a letter, sealed it in a vault,
gave you the blueprints of the vault, the combinations of 1000 other
vaults, access to the best lock smiths in the world, then told you to
read the letter, and you still can't, thats security.
-- Bruce Schneier
http://www.donarmstrong.com
http://rzlab.ucr.edu
Reply to: