Right, but it is - like any other software - vulnerable to possible patent claims. IMO the clause in section 7 is overstated. If a patent makes it impossible to freely distribute a program, what difference does it make when the license says: Under this circumstances, you may not distribute the program? It only means you cannot buy yourself out, so for example a commercial distributor could not legaly buy a MS patent license and keep distributing Linux. But it is unlikely anyway that a distributor would want to go that way and the free software community would definitely not support it.
Learn about Linux
Download Linux
Get Linux help
Re:apache is NOT GPL
Posted by: ammoQ on July 20, 2004 09:20 PM#