apache license 2.0 for consideration

[John Cowan]

Roy T. Fielding scripsit:

> "Code incorporating patents, when the code and contributors' patents are
> licensed solely under the MIT license, cannot be incorporated into a
> derivative work distributed under GPLv2, because any recipient who
> receives a copy of such a derivative work has no rights to use any of
> the patents incorporated into the original MIT code."
> 
> Why, then, is the MIT license compatible with the GPL?

Because the MIT license is silent about patents; in and of itself,
it can't do anything to require you to breach the GPL's licensing
terms.  (It may be that the word "use" provides an implied patent
license.)  A specific MIT-licensed program may be GPL-incompatible,
but MIT-licensed programs as a class are not, because they don't
impose any requirements incompatible with the GPL's.

-- 
Where the wombat has walked,            John Cowan <jcowan at reutershealth.com>
it will inevitably walk again.          http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
--
license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3