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

Re: Taking a position on anti-patent licenses (was ' Re: Bug#289856: mdnsresponder: Wrong license')



Steve Langasek wrote:

On Wed, Jan 26, 2005 at 11:41:31PM +1300, Nick Phillips wrote:
On Tue, Jan 25, 2005 at 09:17:34PM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
Lost attribution, Josh I think
Requiring that distributors of a piece of software refrain from making
accusations of patent infringement regarding the software itself is
consistent with the goal of upholding the freedoms of users over that
software.  As such, we consider license condititions acceptable that
terminate a licensee's rights to the software if that licensee raises a
patent lawsuit claiming that the software in question infringes their
patent(s).

I'm not sure I understand where you're at now. Earlier, you seemed to
agree with the kind of restriction that Josh mentioned.

Matthew Garrett's subsequent message pinpoints where I am with this:
terminating patent licenses in response to patent claims is fine, requiring
distributors to allow royalty-free distribution if they're going to engage
in distribution at all (as in the GPL) is fine, but terminating copyright
licenses in response to defense of one's patent rights is not ok.
Steve,
If I follow you correctly
A - writes program #49 and licenced under GPL-compliant-patent-defending-licence B - distributed program #49 to C-D (may or may not have made enhancement/change) C - determines their patent is infringed by program #49 and launches legal action (presumably against A, B, & D) E - may have patents infringed by program #49, but is otherwise uninvolved & takes no action F - determines their patent is infringed by program #49 and launches legal action (presumably against A, B, & D) We know that no option is available to use the licence to defend against F, unless we use the unacceptable path of cross-contamination, etc. (ie any software patent defence terminates all software licences with patent defence clause)

Josh wants C to lose their licence to use program #49 as a result of legal action as a mechanism to defend A, B & D's rights to develop, distribute & use program #49.

You want C to lose any patent licences granted for program #49. How does that help defend program #49 and hedge software patents?

Dave





Reply to: