Re: How can we submit code patches that implement our (pending) patents?

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Chris Travers
Тема Re: How can we submit code patches that implement our (pending) patents?
Дата
Msg-id CAN-RpxAjUsa=7KU-1gZwP+9wz5Tk77z+i7V+0c15GwgxMyWxrA@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: How can we submit code patches that implement our (pending)patents?  (Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>)
Список pgsql-hackers


On Sat, Jul 7, 2018 at 9:01 PM Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> wrote:
Hi,

On 2018-07-07 20:51:56 +0200, David Fetter wrote:
> As to "dual license," that's another legal thicket in which we've been
> wise not to involve ourselves. "Dual licensing" is generally used to
> assert proprietary rights followed immediately by a demand for
> payment. This is a thing we don't want to do, and it's not a thing we
> should be enabling others to do as part of our project.  If they wish
> to do that, they're welcome to do it without our imprimatur.

This is pure FUD.  Obviously potential results of dual licensing depends
on the license chosen. None of what you describe has anything to do with
potential pieces of dual PG License / Apache 2.0 licensed code in PG, or
anything similar. You could at any time choose to only use /
redistribute postgres, including derivatives, under the rights either
license permits.

I think there's fair arguments to be made that we do not want to go fo
for dual licensing with apache 2.0. Biggest among them that the current
situation is the established practice. But let's have the arguments be
real, not FUD.

First, generally, dual licensing is used to assert proprietary rights and that's actually the issue here (the scope of the patent-holder's rights) and the fact that it would change the future code use in some not very nice ways.  The major exception I know of is the Perl situation where you have this GPL v2/Artistic License release but I am not entirely sure the historical reasons for this.

The problem here is the scope of a patent right is different here and this would effectively mean the Apache License is the real license of the product.

I assume we agree that the PostgreSQL license plus a patent encumbrance would be the same as the scope of the patent license, not the scope of the copyright license.  

Andres



--
Best Regards,
Chris Travers
Database Administrator

Tel: +49 162 9037 210 | Skype: einhverfr | www.adjust.com 
Saarbrücker Straße 37a, 10405 Berlin

В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: "Ideriha, Takeshi"
Дата:
Сообщение: RE: Global shared meta cache
Следующее
От: David Rowley
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: How to make partitioning scale better for larger numbers of partitions