I don't see this making it non-free

I don't see this making it non-free

Posted Sep 26, 2002 18:15 UTC (Thu) by gleef (guest, #1004)
Parent article: Looking the OpenSSL gift horse in the mouth

Assuming that the Sun license without this clause is a Free license (I haven't read the license in full), I don't see how the quoted clause would make anything non-Free.

This clause starts "In addition, Sun covenants to all licensees who...". Unless my legalese translator is shot, this becomes, when translated to plain English, "Also, you can take the license as it stands, but if you also agree to an additional thing, we will agree to an additional thing". Phrased another way: in addition to the Free software license, Sun offers a reciprocal patent agreement to whoever wants one.

So, Sun offers a free license, or, if you so choose, you can have the same a license plus a contract promising that you will neither sue nor be sued by Sun regarding certain patents. This is no different than Cygwin or Ghostscript shipping with the Free GPL, or if you so choose, you can have a non-Free license also. In fact, in many ways, it's better than the Cygwin or Ghostscript situations: Under both licenses you can always share, you can sell it, you can modify it, you can share modifications. You never sign away your right to use the software as part of the license, and if you want, you have an assurance that Sun won't use patent law to prevent you from using the software in spite of the license. Individuals can choose on their own whether or not they want such assurance, and distribute under the Free license regardless of their choice.

---

(Log in to post comments)