3 ms·
You are assuming that the patent-holding organization is the same as the open-sourcing organization; they could be legally separate and controlled by the parent
by olefoo 12y ago
You are assuming that the patent-holding organization is the same as the open-sourcing organization; they could be legally separate and controlled by the parent corporation.
In this case; you would be worried about software that was widely used and had both infringing and non-infringing uses. Especially if the patent-holding org waited for several years before they started enforcing.
The software license and patent grants are orthogonal; and while it's not a good look for an organization to give with one hand and take with the other it's certainly a legally plausible strategy.
- malandrew 12y agoIANAL, but I would imagine that in such a situation you may be able to get the case thrown own because you could demonstrate that the licensing organization and the patent-holding organization are related and that the license was not offered in good faith.
- olefoo 12y agoActually you wouldn't be able to show any such thing. The license is a grant of one set of rights ( to use the software, make copies, resell it, incorporate it into products, etc. ) but the Patents would be the enforcement of another set of rights ( to prevent infringement of the protected idea ) the two sets of rights are orthogonal, and although you might have rights to use the software from a copyright licensing perspective; doing so might be an infringement on their patent rights. And those two sets of rights need not inhere in the same organization. Remember when Microsoft was threatening to use it's patent portfolio against any company that used linux...?