[llvm-dev] RFC: Improving license & patent issues in the LLVM community

Daniel Berlin via llvm-dev llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
Mon Oct 19 10:40:50 PDT 2015

On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 10:24 AM, Joachim Durchholz via llvm-dev
<llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> Am 19.10.2015 um 17:25 schrieb Chris Lattner via llvm-dev:
>> Unfortunately, adding the Apache CLA also has several disadvantages
>> as well:
>> - It adds new barriers for new contributors to LLVM.  We don’t
>> currently have a process where you need to sign (or click through) a
>> form, and adding one is a barrier in certain situations (e.g. it
>> requires individuals to disclose sensitive personal information like
>> mailing addresses etc, and may require extra levels of legal approval
>> in corporate situations).
> If you want to extend a patent license to any LLVM user, you need legal
> approval from the patent holder, and that inevitably means paperwork.

Speaking as an IP lawyer, No it does not require more than the CLA or
the license provide.
If you want details, i'm happy to chat, but suffice to say, either of
the CLA or relicensing option would provide the same patent

More information about the llvm-dev mailing list