Compatibility of the AFL with the GPL

[Russell Nelson]

Eben Moglen writes:
 > No, that's not quite right.  We do have to resolve one question, which
 > is whether the effect of the AFL is to pass through the patent-
 > retaliation provision on code which is relicensed.

Larry's taught me not to paraphrase, so let's look at the actual
language:

    Mutual Termination for Patent Action. This License shall terminate
    automatically and You may no longer exercise any of the rights
    granted to You by this License if You file a lawsuit in any court
    alleging that any OSI Certified open source software that is
    licensed under any license containing this "Mutual Termination for
    Patent Action" clause infringes any patent claims that are
    essential to use that software.

 > C modifies to make HOO, distributes under GPL, and later sues A
 > alleging patent infringement by A in another program released under
 > AFL.  What's the result here?

HOO is OSI Certified open source because it uses the GPL.  However,
the GPL does not contain this or any "Mutual Termination for Patent
Action" clause.  Therefore C's license is not terminated.

-- 
-russ nelson   angry-economist.russnelson.com   | "What Problem Are You Trying
Crynwr sells support for free software  | PGPok | To Solve?" is a service mark
521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315 268 1925 voice | of Crynwr Software.
Potsdam, NY 13676-3213  | +1 315 268 9201 FAX   | 
--
license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3