develooper Front page | perl.artistic2 | Postings from April 2006

Re: reconciling 4(c)ii with 13

Thread Previous | Thread Next
From:
Nicholas Clark
Date:
April 28, 2006 16:25
Subject:
Re: reconciling 4(c)ii with 13
Message ID:
20060428160138.GU45236@plum.flirble.org
On Fri, Apr 28, 2006 at 08:48:27AM -0700, Allison Randal wrote:
> On Apr 26, 2006, at 2:38, mock wrote:
> 
> >Can't I do an end run around section 13, by picking an alternate  
> >license that
> >meets 4(c)ii but doesn't have the patent stuff from section 13?   
> >For example
> >GPL v2.
> 
> If anyone did start patent litigation against one of the Perl users  
> (and we'd really prefer they don't), and triggered  section 13, then  
> their right to redistribute under 4(c)(ii) is revoked along with the  
> rest of the license.
> 
> You have to have copyright (because you own the package or because  
> someone granted rights to you) before you can distribute to anyone.

But this revocation cannot chain, surely?

If

1: Company A downloads source from TPF
2: Company A redistributes source onwards under GPLv2 to Company B
3: Company B redistributes source onwards under GPLv2 to Companies C,D,E
4: Company B unhelpfully starts patent litigation against someone

then as Company B obtained the source code under GPLv2, it hasn't broken any
terms of that agreement, so can continue to distribute.

Nicholas Clark

Thread Previous | Thread Next


nntp.perl.org: Perl Programming lists via nntp and http.
Comments to Ask Bjørn Hansen at ask@perl.org | Group listing | About