[License-review] For approval: The Cryptographic Autonomy License (Beta 4)

[Pamela Chestek]

On 12/6/2019 12:13 PM, Josh Berkus wrote:
> On 12/6/19 7:48 AM, VanL wrote:
>> On Fri, Dec 6, 2019 at 8:52 AM Nigel T <nigel.2048 at gmail.com
>> <mailto:nigel.2048 at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>>     3.2.a seems to imply to me that there is no patent grant when the
>>     work is used as part of a combination or modification. 
>>
>>
>> This is known as a combination carveout. Patent claims are covered for
>> what is provided to you. If you modify the software in some way so that
>> it infringes a patent *solely because of your modification or
>> combination*, then your actions are not specifically licensed.
>>
>> The rationale is clear: The licensor is only responsible for what they
>> provide to other people, not those peoples' subsequent actions.
>> Otherwise someone could include a single line from someone's software
>> ("#include <stdio.h>") and claim that all the patents owned by that
>> person were licensed.
>>
> Yeah, we discussed this topic with the proposed Oracle downstream
> license too.  It's an inevitable consequence of OSS license patent
> grants; a patent grant cannot include carte blanche grants to any patent
> affecting the software regardless of modifications, and no existing
> license does.  So Van is 100% correct here.
>
I believe this is true of every patent grant in every open source license.

Pam

Pamela S. Chestek
Chestek Legal
PO Box 2492
Raleigh, NC 27602
919-800-8033
pamela at chesteklegal.com
www.chesteklegal.com