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

Re: IBM CPL v1

On Thu, 08 Jun 2006 20:40:09 +0200 Henning Makholm wrote:

> Scripsit Roger Leigh <rleigh@whinlatter.ukfsn.org>
> > Is the IBM Common Public Licence version 1.0 (below) considered
> > DFSG-free?
> We have software under this licence in main already, notably postfix
> and graphviz. The license has been discussed explicitly on
> debian-legal at least once [1] and no flaws big enough to cause it to
> be considered non-free were discovered.
> [1] http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2005/01/msg00297.html
> For my attempt to summarize the 2005 discussion, see
> http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2005/01/msg00847.html


I re-read that thread and then reviewed the license text.
I think I spotted a pair of issues that weren't noticed back in January

Firstoff, the CPL states (at the end of section 3.):

| Each Contributor must identify itself as the originator of its
| Contribution, if any, in a manner that reasonably allows subsequent
| Recipients to identify the originator of the Contribution. 

Does this mean that a Contributor is required to disclose his/her own
real identity in order to exercise the rights granted by the license?

I mean: may I be an anonymous Contributor?
Being forced to disclose my own real identity is a significant
restriction: it would render software under the CPL non-free (because
it's a fee, see DFSG#1).

Secondly, the last two sentences of the license are:

| No party to this Agreement will bring a legal action under this
| Agreement more than one year after the cause of action arose. Each
| party waives its rights to a jury trial in any resulting litigation. 

Why cannot I bring a legal action more than one year after the cause of
This could mean that an infringer will practically become statute-barred
after one year, even if the applicable laws say otherwise.
I don't see this as fair...

Moreover and more concerning: why am I required to waive my rights to a
jury trial in any resulting litigation?
This seems to be a sort of fee (DFSG#1).

> The patent self-destruct feature of the license is quite restrained
> and is within what we generally consider fair self-defense.

I agree.

    :-(   This Universe is buggy! Where's the Creator's BTS?   ;-)
  Francesco Poli                             GnuPG Key ID = DD6DFCF4
 Key fingerprint = C979 F34B 27CE 5CD8 DC12  31B5 78F4 279B DD6D FCF4

Attachment: pgp9M5bvC1qm8.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: