incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Kevin Kluge <>
Subject RE: [PROPOSAL][RFC] CloudStack for the Apache Incubator
Date Wed, 04 Apr 2012 05:57:24 GMT
Citrix is pursuing patents based on prior CloudStack work and expects to continue to do so
in the future.  Citrix is getting these patents to protect the CloudStack user community.
 Consider the case where some other entity states that the use of CloudStack is infringing
on their patents.  Citrix could use these patents to fight this entity and defend the community.
 An incremental benefit is that if Citrix (or any other CloudStack-friendly entity) has a
patent then that patent cannot be acquired by an unfriendly entity.

-kevin (also NAL)

-----Original Message-----
From: David Nalley [] 
Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2012 6:37 PM
Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL][RFC] CloudStack for the Apache Incubator

On Tue, Apr 3, 2012 at 3:34 PM, Donald Whytock <> wrote:
> 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)

Hi Don,

IANAL either, just trying to understand the concern.

So for better or worse software patents exist, as least for those of us in the US, and I,
like the vast majority of folks wish they didn't.
But they do, and while ALv2 seems to remove enforcement opportunities, it would seem to still
provide some defensive patent protection. (e.g.
a proprietary software company trying to enforce patents), and sadly, that's a land grab situation
with first to grab being the presumptive winner. That does make them considerably less desirable,
but not completely so.

I think Citrix is speaking of patents that they already have in process - and potentially
for things that Citrix employed developers would develop in the future, and not for CloudStack
the project in general. (Kevin, please feel free to correct me if I am wrong.) For better
or worse I don't perceive ASF having the desire to or currently the ability to deal with filing
for patents, or even if they would be entitled to in this situation. Based on what we both
read above, there seems to be at least the (non-lawyerly) perception that there is no threat
to users or developers from Citrix acquiring patents.

Again, I am not a lawyer, I am specifically not Citrix's lawyer, and further I speak only
for myself on this particular matter :)


To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message