On Tue, Jan 25, 2005 at 05:35:27PM -0800, Josh Triplett wrote: > >> Debian accepts that it may in certain circumstances be desirable > >> (or at least acceptable) for software licenses to limit certain > >> freedoms in order better to protect Free Software as a whole. A > >> current example of this would be the GPL, and the conditions it > >> places on distribution of derived works -- basically that they > >> must be distributed with source, under the terms of the GPL. > >> In the light of the threat that software patents pose to Free > >> Software, we believe that it is likewise acceptable for software > >> licenses to place conditions on the use of software patents > >> against Free Software authors and distributors. > > I think this is too broad of a statement to actually build a consensus > > around. Which is to say, I don't agree with it because it doesn't specify > > which "conditions" it's acceptable to place on the use of software patents. > > Saying "yes, restrictions are ok" opens the flood gates for people assuming > > that all kinds of abusive restrictions are acceptable. > I agree that this proposition is not specific enough about the types of > conditions that we consider acceptable. I would propose the following > addition to the above text, which I believe specifies a set of > acceptable conditions that many on -legal agree with: > """ > 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). Agree with this, though for clarity I would say "their own patent(s)" for this last. > However, many software licenses choose to go further than that, > requiring that distributors refrain entirely from engaging in patent > lawsuits against any authors of the software, regardless of whether > those lawsuits are related to the software or not. We do not support > the practice of patenting software, but we find it unacceptable for > licenses to place requirements which pertain to other, independent > works. We believe this policy is consistent with the principles behing > in Debian Free Software Guideline 9, "License Must Not Contaminate Other > Software". > """ I agree with this sentiment, though I imagine the wording will need to be tuned a bit before it's possible to build a consensus around this part. -- Steve Langasek postmodern programmer
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature