6 ms·

So we need any american to relicense any CC0 work as 0BSD and then it should be all good.

draw_down 4y ago
I think people are free to license their work as they see fit, and whether Fedora likes that or not is their own business and their own problem.
tinus_hn 4y ago
The silly part is that the licensor claims he will not assert any patent rights regarding the code. But someone else might still do that.
- mormegil 4y ago
  This. The original argument is sideways. When contributing code, you claim to have written it yourself and you grant a copyright license to this work of yours. You don't claim the contributed code does not infringe on any patent. (How could you?? Normal code contributor has no idea how to check that.) So the only evil plan the CC0 prohibition foils (a patent holder contributes code needing patent license under CC0 and later sues for patent infringement) needs only to be slightly modified: the patent holder asks/hires someone to contribute such code. This person grants all rights using BSD0 but obviously cannot grant a patent license to someone else's patent, so the patent holder can still sue.
- mananaysiempre 4y ago
  Someone else might do that anyway, don’t they? (Barring the mutually-assured-destruction clause in Apache-2.0, but even that only works if that someone is simultaneously interested in using the code in question.)
- MichaelCollins 4y ago
  Even if he properly and legally relinquished any and all patent rights, there is nothing to stop him from layering up and suing everybody anyway in direct contradiction to the patent grant. Presumably all the lawsuits would fail, but harassing others with flagrantly horseshit lawsuits is an industry.
MichaelCollins 4y ago
Or they could just bequeath their code to the public domain, and ignore the quirks of foreign legal systems that make that weird in other countries. List of Germans who've been sued for using SQLite without a license: .... [End of list]
- kube-system 4y ago
  Just because SQLite project hasn't sued any Germans doesn't mean there's not legal risk involved. Build a billion dollar company on some "public domain" software in Germany, and you've given a stranger a gun to your head. They might not exercise their copyright, but they also could.
  - naniwaduni 4y ago
    If some foreign rightholder actually tries suing a billion-dollar German company in German court on the basis of lack of license to some software dedicated to the public domain, do you really expect them not to get laughed out of court?
    - kube-system 4y ago
      As I understand, German courts do not recognize public domain dedications, because they recognize “authors rights” which are not fully transferable or licensable.
      - naniwaduni 4y ago
        Do you really think that's going to be the sticking point if someone tries to sue over it?
  - MichaelCollins 4y ago
    Yes, if I imagine myself to be a billion dollar corporation instead of Joe Random, then I have to act differently. But I'm not, and so I don't.
wongarsu 4y ago
In the sense that CC0 work is just public domain in the US, and thus an American can just assign it the 0BSD? Legally that should work, even for non-Americans: the 0BSD doesn't grant anything the CC0 doesn't. But that doesn't work if you assume the 0BSD has a patent grant (by arguing that it gives you permission to use, modify, etc. the software). Then the product of your license reassignment is 0BSD, but doesn't grant permission from all authors, thus preventing its use in Fedora.
- yjftsjthsd-h 4y ago
  > In the sense that CC0 work is just public domain in the US, and thus an American can just assign it the 0BSD? If I search for CC0, the first hit is https://creativecommons.org/share-your-work/public-domain/cc0/ https://creativecommons.org/share-your-work/public-domain/cc... which already starts to answer from the URL, but let me just quote it: > CC0 enables scientists, educators, artists and other creators and owners of copyright- or database-protected content to waive those interests in their works and thereby place them as completely as possible in the public domain, so that others may freely build upon, enhance and reuse the works for any purposes without restriction under copyright or database law. So yes, IANAL but AFAIK CC0 is just "public domain" but spelled out (the rest of that link explains why this might be needed). > and thus an American can just assign it the 0BSD? The catch, as I understand it, is that yes any American could take something under CC0 and re-release it under 0BSD (probably, again IANAL) but they can only give away the rights they had in the first place so they can't say "and nobody can claim a patent infringement on this", only "and I promise you can use this and I won't sue you for patent infringement". The original authors, if they have a patent, could (as this argument goes) still sue for patent infringement because they never agreed not to (allegedly).

I think people are free to license their work as they see fit, and whether Fedora likes that or not is their own business and their own problem.

tinus_hn 4y ago

The silly part is that the licensor claims he will not assert any patent rights regarding the code. But someone else might still do that.

mormegil 4y ago
This. The original argument is sideways. When contributing code, you claim to have written it yourself and you grant a copyright license to this work of yours. You don't claim the contributed code does not infringe on any patent. (How could you?? Normal code contributor has no idea how to check that.) So the only evil plan the CC0 prohibition foils (a patent holder contributes code needing patent license under CC0 and later sues for patent infringement) needs only to be slightly modified: the patent holder asks/hires someone to contribute such code. This person grants all rights using BSD0 but obviously cannot grant a patent license to someone else's patent, so the patent holder can still sue.
mananaysiempre 4y ago
Someone else might do that anyway, don’t they? (Barring the mutually-assured-destruction clause in Apache-2.0, but even that only works if that someone is simultaneously interested in using the code in question.)
MichaelCollins 4y ago
Even if he properly and legally relinquished any and all patent rights, there is nothing to stop him from layering up and suing everybody anyway in direct contradiction to the patent grant. Presumably all the lawsuits would fail, but harassing others with flagrantly horseshit lawsuits is an industry.

MichaelCollins 4y ago

Or they could just bequeath their code to the public domain, and ignore the quirks of foreign legal systems that make that weird in other countries. List of Germans who've been sued for using SQLite without a license: .... [End of list]

kube-system 4y ago
Just because SQLite project hasn't sued any Germans doesn't mean there's not legal risk involved. Build a billion dollar company on some "public domain" software in Germany, and you've given a stranger a gun to your head. They might not exercise their copyright, but they also could.
- naniwaduni 4y ago
  If some foreign rightholder actually tries suing a billion-dollar German company in German court on the basis of lack of license to some software dedicated to the public domain, do you really expect them not to get laughed out of court?
  - kube-system 4y ago
    As I understand, German courts do not recognize public domain dedications, because they recognize “authors rights” which are not fully transferable or licensable.
    - naniwaduni 4y ago
      Do you really think that's going to be the sticking point if someone tries to sue over it?
- MichaelCollins 4y ago
  Yes, if I imagine myself to be a billion dollar corporation instead of Joe Random, then I have to act differently. But I'm not, and so I don't.

wongarsu 4y ago

In the sense that CC0 work is just public domain in the US, and thus an American can just assign it the 0BSD? Legally that should work, even for non-Americans: the 0BSD doesn't grant anything the CC0 doesn't. But that doesn't work if you assume the 0BSD has a patent grant (by arguing that it gives you permission to use, modify, etc. the software). Then the product of your license reassignment is 0BSD, but doesn't grant permission from all authors, thus preventing its use in Fedora.

yjftsjthsd-h 4y ago
> In the sense that CC0 work is just public domain in the US, and thus an American can just assign it the 0BSD? If I search for CC0, the first hit is https://creativecommons.org/share-your-work/public-domain/cc0/ https://creativecommons.org/share-your-work/public-domain/cc... which already starts to answer from the URL, but let me just quote it: > CC0 enables scientists, educators, artists and other creators and owners of copyright- or database-protected content to waive those interests in their works and thereby place them as completely as possible in the public domain, so that others may freely build upon, enhance and reuse the works for any purposes without restriction under copyright or database law. So yes, IANAL but AFAIK CC0 is just "public domain" but spelled out (the rest of that link explains why this might be needed). > and thus an American can just assign it the 0BSD? The catch, as I understand it, is that yes any American could take something under CC0 and re-release it under 0BSD (probably, again IANAL) but they can only give away the rights they had in the first place so they can't say "and nobody can claim a patent infringement on this", only "and I promise you can use this and I won't sue you for patent infringement". The original authors, if they have a patent, could (as this argument goes) still sue for patent infringement because they never agreed not to (allegedly).