MS-RL equivalents?

[Matthew Flaschen]

Chris Travers wrote:

> I read the MS-RL differently than you.  I think it only addresses the
> patents that a contributor has which read directly on that
> contribution.  I.e. if contributor A's patch infringes in contributor
> B's patent, I don't think the MS-RL provides any license to that
> patent.

I disagree.  The phrase "contribution in the software or derivative
works of the contribution in the software." implies to me that both
would be included, even if contributor A's patch is /after/ B's.  This
is actually broader than, e.g. Apache 2.0.  In fact, it may be a
loophole that allows derivative works that read on unrelated patents.
However, I wouldn't count on that...

> What portion of the MS-RL are you concerned about?
> 
> I would suggest that the Software Freedom Law Center would be better
> able to help you than we are :-)

True.  We are not lawyers, nor is this legal advice.

Matt Flaschen