4 ms·

The BSD license just selectively releases the copyright on the openthread code. It doesn’t affect other legal constructs, like patents or copyrights outside the

by 542458 2y ago

The BSD license just selectively releases the copyright on the openthread code. It doesn’t affect other legal constructs, like patents or copyrights outside the repo.

josephg 2y ago
What are “copyrights outside the repo”? The BSD license doesn’t grant any patent or trademark rights. But how would copyright cause problems?
- 542458 2y ago
  OpenThread is by Google, and not the thread group. Google has released their copyright claims with the BSD license, but the thread group could still C&D you for copyright issues I.e., that your project that includes openthread code violates their spec’s copyright.
  - denton-scratch 2y ago
    > OpenThread is by Google, and not the thread group. Wow. So Google is in the Thread Group, and so is licensed to practice and ship the technology; which they do, in the form of OpenThread, under a permissive licence. BUT anyone that uses OpenThread for anything at all is exposed to legal action unless they cough up the fees. Is that right? So this is hard for me to understand: Google's OpenThread code is open to be inspected, and you can contribute to it, under a BSD-like licence; but Thread Group holds the IP, and reserves the right to sue. As always, the patents covering it are not listed, and some of them might be submarines. I don't see why it's called "Open" Thread, if you probably can't even use the library without a Thread Group licence.
    - denschub 2y ago
      This is the reason why this notice exists in the OpenThread repo: https://github.com/openthread/openthread/blob/1fceb225b3858a990ffb6ce28f30b8b3dfba1614/NOTICE https://github.com/openthread/openthread/blob/1fceb225b3858a...
    - ang_cire 2y ago
      I'm sure Thread Group would love to stop Google making OpenThread available, but unless they want to tee-off against Google's legal team over patent infringement, the easier route for them is just threatening everyone else out of using it. All the combined wealth of every individual who has ever wanted to tinker with Thread is a fraction of Google's warchest.
      - denschub 2y ago
        > I'm sure Thread Group would love to stop Google making OpenThread available Google is a founding member of the Thread Group. OpenThread exists publicly because it's the only widely available implementation that's shipped in a lot of places. Nordic's SDK, for example, uses OpenThread. OpenThread is built by and for members of the Thread Group, and used by them. It's fairly clear that Google doesn't care much about anyone else.
    - tomxor 2y ago
      > OpenThread code is open to be inspected, and you can contribute to it, under a BSD-like licence; but Thread Group holds the IP, and reserves the right to sue. As always, the patents covering it are not listed, and some of them might be submarines Sounds like they are trying to have their cake and eat it? Release code on a copy left license to try and gain open source contributions, but also force people to pay if they want to use it by crippling it with patents and some weird licensing BS. Except no one outside of large corporations already paying for it are going to ever contribute code... how could they, you can't contribute code in a vacuum.
      - denton-scratch 2y ago
        > Release code on a copy left license It's not a copyleft licence, it's a modified BSD-style licence. Basically, you can do what you like with it, except (a) delete or replace the licence, and (b) trade on the names of Open Group or it's developers. > crippling it with patents and some weird licensing BS. Not to mention that part of the lock-in is that certified implementations MUST validate a certificate from a peer, which MUST have been issued by Thread Group, and they will only issue one to a licensee. That is, it literally won't work unless the implementor has a licence.
delusional 2y ago
The 3-Clause BSD doesn't NOT release copyright. The copyright holder extends you a perpetual license to redistribute and modify the copyrighted work, provided you adhere to the license. They still hold the copyright. Without them holding the copyright, the 3 clauses would be meaningless, since they'd have no way to enforce them. Releasing the license is commonly refereed to as "public domain", but it's not actually possible to relinquish the copyright in all territories, and therefore people generally prefer some kind of license.

by 542458 2y ago

The BSD license just selectively releases the copyright on the openthread code. It doesn’t affect other legal constructs, like patents or copyrights outside the repo.

josephg 2y ago

What are “copyrights outside the repo”? The BSD license doesn’t grant any patent or trademark rights. But how would copyright cause problems?

542458 2y ago
OpenThread is by Google, and not the thread group. Google has released their copyright claims with the BSD license, but the thread group could still C&D you for copyright issues I.e., that your project that includes openthread code violates their spec’s copyright.
- denton-scratch 2y ago
  > OpenThread is by Google, and not the thread group. Wow. So Google is in the Thread Group, and so is licensed to practice and ship the technology; which they do, in the form of OpenThread, under a permissive licence. BUT anyone that uses OpenThread for anything at all is exposed to legal action unless they cough up the fees. Is that right? So this is hard for me to understand: Google's OpenThread code is open to be inspected, and you can contribute to it, under a BSD-like licence; but Thread Group holds the IP, and reserves the right to sue. As always, the patents covering it are not listed, and some of them might be submarines. I don't see why it's called "Open" Thread, if you probably can't even use the library without a Thread Group licence.
  - denschub 2y ago
    This is the reason why this notice exists in the OpenThread repo: https://github.com/openthread/openthread/blob/1fceb225b3858a990ffb6ce28f30b8b3dfba1614/NOTICE https://github.com/openthread/openthread/blob/1fceb225b3858a...
  - ang_cire 2y ago
    I'm sure Thread Group would love to stop Google making OpenThread available, but unless they want to tee-off against Google's legal team over patent infringement, the easier route for them is just threatening everyone else out of using it. All the combined wealth of every individual who has ever wanted to tinker with Thread is a fraction of Google's warchest.
    - denschub 2y ago
      > I'm sure Thread Group would love to stop Google making OpenThread available Google is a founding member of the Thread Group. OpenThread exists publicly because it's the only widely available implementation that's shipped in a lot of places. Nordic's SDK, for example, uses OpenThread. OpenThread is built by and for members of the Thread Group, and used by them. It's fairly clear that Google doesn't care much about anyone else.
  - tomxor 2y ago
    > OpenThread code is open to be inspected, and you can contribute to it, under a BSD-like licence; but Thread Group holds the IP, and reserves the right to sue. As always, the patents covering it are not listed, and some of them might be submarines Sounds like they are trying to have their cake and eat it? Release code on a copy left license to try and gain open source contributions, but also force people to pay if they want to use it by crippling it with patents and some weird licensing BS. Except no one outside of large corporations already paying for it are going to ever contribute code... how could they, you can't contribute code in a vacuum.
    - denton-scratch 2y ago
      > Release code on a copy left license It's not a copyleft licence, it's a modified BSD-style licence. Basically, you can do what you like with it, except (a) delete or replace the licence, and (b) trade on the names of Open Group or it's developers. > crippling it with patents and some weird licensing BS. Not to mention that part of the lock-in is that certified implementations MUST validate a certificate from a peer, which MUST have been issued by Thread Group, and they will only issue one to a licensee. That is, it literally won't work unless the implementor has a licence.

delusional 2y ago

The 3-Clause BSD doesn't NOT release copyright. The copyright holder extends you a perpetual license to redistribute and modify the copyrighted work, provided you adhere to the license. They still hold the copyright. Without them holding the copyright, the 3 clauses would be meaningless, since they'd have no way to enforce them. Releasing the license is commonly refereed to as "public domain", but it's not actually possible to relinquish the copyright in all territories, and therefore people generally prefer some kind of license.