On Wednesday February 9 2011 18:23:51 Andy Ray Terrel wrote: > On Wed, Feb 9, 2011 at 5:48 PM, Johan Hake <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Wednesday February 9 2011 15:37:38 Andy Ray Terrel wrote: > >> On Wed, Feb 9, 2011 at 12:37 PM, Anders Logg <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > On Wed, Feb 09, 2011 at 10:23:44AM -0800, Johan Hake wrote: > >> >> On Wednesday February 9 2011 10:14:51 Johan Hake wrote: > >> >> > On Wednesday February 9 2011 10:10:04 Anders Logg wrote: > >> >> > > On Wed, Feb 09, 2011 at 09:52:21AM -0800, Johan Hake wrote: > >> >> > > > Hello! > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > UCSD is not willing to sign the consent statement about GPL > >> >> > > > 3... > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > From the answer I got: > >> >> > > > LGPL incorporates GPL 3, and that is the problem. Earlier > >> >> > > > versions of the GPL did not deal in patent rights, while > >> >> > > > Version 3 does. It would commit a license to the entire UC > >> >> > > > patent estate, whether the inventors were an informed > >> >> > > > participant or not. I would need to consult further with UC > >> >> > > > General Counsel for a detailed answer, but the spirit is that > >> >> > > > the license overreaches in its commitments to patent rights > >> >> > > > beyond what the university is willing to do. > >> >> > > > >> >> > > That seems strange. So UCSD will want to retain the right to sue > >> >> > > users of DOLFIN if you should happen to add code to DOLFIN that > >> >> > > infringes on some patent held by UCSD? > >> >> > > >> >> > I have no clue what it means. But I will ask. > >> >> > >> >> Here is a more elaborated explaination: > >> >> > >> >> The language is pretty clear in section 11 of the GPL V3 license - > >> >> it commits all the rights of the Licensor (the Regents of the > >> >> University of California) to a license. Our normal licensing > >> >> practice is to license one technology at a time, and we do not > >> >> license the other patents along with it. Our guiding principles for > >> >> licensing are at this link > >> >> > >> >> <http://invent.ucsd.edu/faculty/policies/guiding-principles.shtml> > >> >> > >> >> Johan > >> > > >> > Is it this paragraph? > >> > > >> > "Each contributor grants you a non-exclusive, worldwide, royalty-free > >> > patent license under the contributor's essential patent claims, to > >> > make, use, sell, offer for sale, import and otherwise run, modify and > >> > propagate the contents of its contributor version." > >> > > >> > Assuming that something in your contract makes UCSD the "contributor" > >> > and not you personally, this means that UCSD grants any patent > >> > licenses needed to run the code that you put into FEniCS. > >> > > >> > The other option is to reserve the right to sue the users of FEniCS > >> > for any UCSD patents that your code in FEnICS is infringing upon. > >> > > >> > As far as I understand, it doesn't say anything about other patents > >> > that UCSD have that are unrelated to the actual code in FEniCS. > >> > > >> > If they refuse to sign the consent form, will they also refuse to let > >> > you continue to contribute code to FEniCS? And sue us all for the code > >> > you have contributed so far? > >> > > >> > -- > >> > Anders > >> > >> In the US, code and patentable "Intellectual Property" is usually > >> considered property of the employer. So the contributor has no right > >> to give away the rights of a company's patents. If they sign this > >> form and Johan uploads something covered under another patent then it > >> affects their rights to patent royalties. So in effect they are > >> saying they reserve the right to sue FEniCS (but probably Simula) if > >> you encroach on their patents. > >> > >> In practice, most open source code from US universities is distributed > >> without regard to the law and for the most part everyone ignores it. > >> For example, TTI-C should be the copyright holder on much of the code > >> that you wrote in Chicago. > > > > Does your university have the same policies? I guess I should just kept > > quite then... > > I'm still waiting for word back from my department, but my > contributions are so small that I don't think there could be any > claims from my employer.
Would it be a point to collect what I have done during the stay here at UCSD, and hopefully show that there wont be anything to claim? Most of my work in FEniCS I did when I was at Simula. Johan > -- Andy > > > Johan > > > >> -- Andy > >> > >> >> > > > Are there any others that have got a similare answer? > >> >> > > > >> >> > > No problems so far. Here's what we have so far: > >> >> > > http://www.fenicsproject.org/pub/copyright/authors/ > >> >> > > http://www.fenicsproject.org/pub/copyright/institutions/ > >> >> > > >> >> > I guess the Cambridge statement is not correct? > >> >> > > >> >> > Johan > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > _______________________________________________ > >> >> > Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~fenics > >> >> > Post to : [email protected] > >> >> > Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~fenics > >> >> > More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp > >> > > >> > _______________________________________________ > >> > Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~fenics > >> > Post to : [email protected] > >> > Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~fenics > >> > More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~fenics Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~fenics More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
