On Mar 30, 2005, at 10:48 PM, Lawrence Rosen wrote:
Is it possible for someone to re-phrase this?? I can't understand it.
I didn't write the Apache license and I'm not a great fan of the wording of
its patent grant. But here's what I think it means, and here's how the
OSL/AFL licenses state what I thought was the same concept:
2) Grant of Patent License. Licensor hereby grants You a world-wide, royalty-free, non-exclusive, perpetual, sublicenseable license, under patent claims owned or controlled by the Licensor that are embodied in the Original Work as furnished by the Licensor, to make, use, sell and offer for sale the Original Work and Derivative Works.
If this does NOT have the same effect as the Apache license, I'd appreciate
an explanation of how it differs.
I was hoping you'd answer my question from this morning, but this might do - I thought the Apache License doesn't grant you the right to sublicense... (and thus patent license doesn't apply to derivative works...)
geir
-- Geir Magnusson Jr +1-203-665-6437 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------- DISCLAIMER: Discussions on this list are informational and educational only, are not privileged and do not constitute legal advice. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
