[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 mailing list