Posted by: Anonymous Coward
on July 20, 2004 01:19 PM
I've always understood the GPL's patent clause to protect users from patent-poisoning on the part of GPL authors. The scenario is like this:
1. I patent some piece of technology. 2. I release a GPL implementation of it, or patch someone else's product to include it, not telling anyone about the patent. 3. I wait for the code to become widely used and a de facto standard. 4. I now demand royalties from everyone using the code.
Section 7 prevents this scenario from unfolding by saying that if I demand royalties, then all users immediately lose the license. If they lose the license, they aren't "using" my software, and hence there is no one to collect royalties from.
A slightly different scenario plays out if someone else infringed my patent in GPL code. If I demand royalties, then the code cannot be distributed and once again, there are no users for me to collect money from. My attempt to collect royalties instantly kills my ability to do so.
The danger here is that Microsoft may not be seeking to force people to pay royalties. They may instead be happy with "the GPL software is now contraband".
Learn about Linux
Download Linux
Get Linux help
MAD provision in GPL
Posted by: Anonymous Coward on July 20, 2004 01:19 PM1. I patent some piece of technology.
2. I release a GPL implementation of it, or patch someone else's product to include it, not telling anyone about the patent.
3. I wait for the code to become widely used and a de facto standard.
4. I now demand royalties from everyone using the code.
Section 7 prevents this scenario from unfolding by saying that if I demand royalties, then all users immediately lose the license. If they lose the license, they aren't "using" my software, and hence there is no one to collect royalties from.
A slightly different scenario plays out if someone else infringed my patent in GPL code. If I demand royalties, then the code cannot be distributed and once again, there are no users for me to collect money from. My attempt to collect royalties instantly kills my ability to do so.
The danger here is that Microsoft may not be seeking to force people to pay royalties. They may instead be happy with "the GPL software is now contraband".
#