4 ms·

I would imagine that if you submit code to an open source project and leave the license as it is, then you release that code under the license. The only way it

I would imagine that if you submit code to an open source project and leave the license as it is, then you release that code under the license. The only way it wouldn't be is if someone other than the owner/copyright holder submitted patented code.

slimsag 10y ago
But, the point is, code and patents aren't one in the same, and submitting code doesn't imply anything about patent ownership or rights. For example, I could try to submit a pull request to an audio/video project to add an H.264 decoder/encoder that I wrote myself. That is OK because I wrote the code, and therefor I own the copyright to that code. However, anyone who tries to use this code can be sued by MPEG LA for money or they can even ask them to cease and desist outright if they wish -- because it's their patented technology! It also works the other way around, if I wrote both the code and acquired a patent for the technology. A CLA is the only way to stay safe, as far as I understand, but most open source projects just don't use them (except very large ones, like the Linux kernel etc).
- anewhnaccount 10y ago
  Many OSS licences include some sort of provision for patents. See for example here the Apache licence: http://en.swpat.org/wiki/Patent_clauses_in_software_licences#Apache_License_2.0 http://en.swpat.org/wiki/Patent_clauses_in_software_licences...
  - slimsag 10y ago
    Neat! Thank you a ton for linking me to this page! I've never seen it before. According to this, then, Apache v2.0, GPL v3, and MPL 2.0 are the only (well known) licenses with explicit patent grants. It also mentions that there is an 'implicit' patent grant provided by the revised BSD license[1] but that it has never been tested in court (which I presume means it is not advised). I guess Apache 2.0 (or if you're a copyleft kind of guy, GPL3) is the way to go! [1] http://en.swpat.org/wiki/Patent_clauses_in_software_licences#Implicit_grants http://en.swpat.org/wiki/Patent_clauses_in_software_licences...
    - technomancy 10y ago
      The Eclipse Public License is a bit obscure off the JVM, but it actually has a good patent clause too.
- pritambaral 10y ago
  > most open source projects just don't use them (except very large ones, like the Linux kernel etc Uhh ... The Linux kernel doesn't use a CLA. It uses Developer Certificates of Origin: the Signed-off-by lines.
  - slimsag 10y ago
    You're very right, my apologies!

slimsag 10y ago

But, the point is, code and patents aren't one in the same, and submitting code doesn't imply anything about patent ownership or rights. For example, I could try to submit a pull request to an audio/video project to add an H.264 decoder/encoder that I wrote myself. That is OK because I wrote the code, and therefor I own the copyright to that code. However, anyone who tries to use this code can be sued by MPEG LA for money or they can even ask them to cease and desist outright if they wish -- because it's their patented technology! It also works the other way around, if I wrote both the code and acquired a patent for the technology. A CLA is the only way to stay safe, as far as I understand, but most open source projects just don't use them (except very large ones, like the Linux kernel etc).

anewhnaccount 10y ago
Many OSS licences include some sort of provision for patents. See for example here the Apache licence: http://en.swpat.org/wiki/Patent_clauses_in_software_licences#Apache_License_2.0 http://en.swpat.org/wiki/Patent_clauses_in_software_licences...
- slimsag 10y ago
  Neat! Thank you a ton for linking me to this page! I've never seen it before. According to this, then, Apache v2.0, GPL v3, and MPL 2.0 are the only (well known) licenses with explicit patent grants. It also mentions that there is an 'implicit' patent grant provided by the revised BSD license[1] but that it has never been tested in court (which I presume means it is not advised). I guess Apache 2.0 (or if you're a copyleft kind of guy, GPL3) is the way to go! [1] http://en.swpat.org/wiki/Patent_clauses_in_software_licences#Implicit_grants http://en.swpat.org/wiki/Patent_clauses_in_software_licences...
  - technomancy 10y ago
    The Eclipse Public License is a bit obscure off the JVM, but it actually has a good patent clause too.
pritambaral 10y ago
> most open source projects just don't use them (except very large ones, like the Linux kernel etc Uhh ... The Linux kernel doesn't use a CLA. It uses Developer Certificates of Origin: the Signed-off-by lines.
- slimsag 10y ago
  You're very right, my apologies!