[llvm-dev] RFC: Improving license & patent issues in the LLVM community
Joachim Durchholz via llvm-dev
llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
Mon Oct 19 12:39:31 PDT 2015
Am 19.10.2015 um 19:40 schrieb Daniel Berlin:
> 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.
Then how is a change in licensing needed at all?
More information about the llvm-dev