Re: Patent clauses in licenses

[Matthew Garrett <mgarrett@chiark.greenend.org.uk>]

ml@mherrn.de <ml@mherrn.de> wrote:

> Such a clause excludes certain (or more likely undefinded) person
> subgroups from the rights all other user get for this software. Not per
> default, but after a certain action of the user, but the software
> restricts its use to certain person subgroups. That seems to me very
> arbitrary.

The GPL does much the same. If someone distributes GPLed software
without complying with section 3 (which gives you various ways in which
you have to make source code available to the recipient), then they lose
the right to use that GPLed software. We have various licenses that
terminate if you do something "wrong" - we've just come to the
conclusion that it's acceptable that people not be allowed to do that
thing.

In the past, we've accepted various compromises on freedom because they
help free software. The GPL's forced provision of source code is one of
these. If we were writing the DFSG for the first time now, where would
we draw the line with patent-related clauses?

-- 
Matthew Garrett | mjg59-chiark.mail.debian.project@srcf.ucam.org