incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Joe Schaefer <>
Subject Re: [PROPOSAL][RFC] CloudStack for the Apache Incubator
Date Tue, 03 Apr 2012 19:42:40 GMT
Patent law isn't the same as Copyright law- the idea
that you can "do anything you want" with patents covered
by Apache Licensed code will only wind up getting you
sued someday (IANAL).

Do consult a lawyer if you need advice on how any particular
patent may be implemented outside of code received directly
under the Apache License.  No doubt there is some degree
of latitude, but it is far short of what an arbitrary
"derivative work" might try to do.

> From: Donald Whytock <>
>Sent: Tuesday, April 3, 2012 3:34 PM
>Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL][RFC] CloudStack for the Apache Incubator
>On Tue, Apr 3, 2012 at 3:06 PM, David Nalley <> wrote:
>> On Tue, Apr 3, 2012 at 2:09 PM, Donald Whytock <> wrote:
>>> Plan"...What do the patents cover/restrict?  Is a patent even
>>> compatible with ALv2?
>> Speaking only for myself, Section 3 of ALv2 seems to address patents
>> held by contributors. Or am I misunderstanding the concern around
>> patents?
>No, if I'm reading ALv2 section 3 right, that essentially says people
>that use the ALv2-licensed material are granted the right to use the
>material in the same way that they would if the contributor of the
>material had a patent on it and granted license to that patent.  The
>proposal, on the other hand, says Citrix has filed for patents on the
>material they're donating and will continue to do so.  I'm wondering
>what they think the patents are intended to accomplish if, by the ALv2
>license, just about anyone is permitted to do just about anything with
>the code.
>Don (who INAL)
>To unsubscribe, e-mail:
>For additional commands, e-mail:
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message