On Mon, Jul 9, 2018 at 08:29:08AM +0000, Tsunakawa, Takayuki wrote:
> Thank you for supporting me, Andres. And please don't mind, David. I
> don't think you are attacking me. I understand your concern and that
> you are also trying to protect PostgreSQL.
>
> On the other hand, I think TPL seems less defensive. I read
> in some report that Apache License and some other open source
> licenses were created partly due to lack of patent description
> in BSD and GPLv2.
>
> How can we assure you? How about attaching something like the
> following to relevant patches or on our web site?
>
> [Excerpt from Red Hat Patent Promise] Red Hat intends Our Promise to
> be irrevocable (except as stated herein), and binding and enforceable
> against Red Hat and assignees of, or successors to, Red Hat’s
> patents (and any patents directly or indirectly issuing from Red
> Hat’s patent applications). As part of Our Promise, if Red Hat
> sells, exclusively licenses, or otherwise assigns or transfers
> patents or patent applications to a party, we will require the party
> to agree in writing to be bound to Our Promise for those patents
> and for patents directly or indirectly issuing on those patent
> applications. We will also require the party to agree in writing to so
> bind its own assignees, transferees, and exclusive licensees.
Notice this makes no mention of what happens to the patents if the
company goes bankrupt. My guess is that in such a situation the company
would have no control over who buys the patents or how they are used.
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
+ As you are, so once was I. As I am, so you will be. +
+ Ancient Roman grave inscription +