[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 13:05:12 PDT 2015
Am 19.10.2015 um 21:40 schrieb Daniel Berlin:
> On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 12:39 PM, Joachim Durchholz via llvm-dev
> <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>> 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?
> The CLA = the Apache CLA option
> The License = The Apache License option
> Since neither of those options is currently used, ...
The point I was trying to make was that to accept patented code, the
LLVM project would need a copyright and a patent license, and given
published expert opinion (as far as I have seen it), this seems to be a
lot easier for copyright than for patents.
E.g. a submitter could get away with claiming that the patent grant was
unintentional, while for copyright that would be hard to believe if the
act of submission is also the act of publication.
I wasn't 100% clear on that, as that was more a side issue rather than
something I felt was very central.
Feel free to correct Chris if you think the current submission workflow
is fully sufficient to handle patents.
More information about the llvm-dev