From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wj0-f176.google.com (mail-wj0-f176.google.com [209.85.210.176]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 133C236E for ; Thu, 24 Nov 2016 20:05:35 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-wj0-f176.google.com with SMTP id qp4so40573976wjc.3 for ; Thu, 24 Nov 2016 11:05:35 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=6wind-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=from:to:cc:date:message-id:in-reply-to:references:user-agent :subject:mime-version; bh=SvAyqUpcqWzbfgDsGK8Pq34e/M/uPKkc6CtDsFT1/tU=; b=okAwOXiHNCbIf6WkSS5cv+kHGDk/VQCTR40TTA5aCTusA5qoiyMmuk5QvhXUm4enq6 p7U6zXHXbAT+wyN+WtIQbHsaCNBb09tKOR4GB/mUqkISGvJx2ojnvkD6ma25WcHrcZ8M xvNFMb++a251bVvIgJZJjfUBqgVB+HbXigFpdywrdbKz/vWlTytYYljn1ZAcZ/bYqmUU LZXlQCODjmYzmmw93XMO2SWudj+qQIq5Tg+Hl9XiIpvp4O1jOZCyL+iM2ym+8caA29mT /Yphg3hmVpWwLFVA4/cViIWXSulI4ANLnSLayrZmF+cUiyv+nhjloEDz6RKs7nlYyFpL 3pOg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:date:message-id:in-reply-to :references:user-agent:subject:mime-version; bh=SvAyqUpcqWzbfgDsGK8Pq34e/M/uPKkc6CtDsFT1/tU=; b=hBORw1XOvDY0m54orXeWOiiOn9eTI9HIeWqQUm80qBHRCW4I5/l9Cpot5QIvxVaQor eu284gtRnoTs5z1NpTP9FUQ0v8txrAfFdeVYvF0NBLDODvmPmNxl1ZIRPBseS+oJ2ZoJ vFd4stEuj0bL9JkwdHzzgMoSfWTLwB/fHGUx2mqK4bgGdu/3OhqWtdAC4n+PyLvHbLsA MnK6nlSO5hn+bEboviAEtX8IQGU0GbQaWWRF8sKyzwbQ5MKSZKLfYu7yehRz+O9XnLqA 2JwFVBwfPKyodgH+Gc1C2eZXiiKMh+SdkDfNyPt4+rrm1UoDhmE3JnXfpXS5kKoP1Lvi 7wpA== X-Gm-Message-State: AKaTC00YC8QcN/tmKc3wxAvyA4k11pRI2Nq6BlUB2ubYOWRiqjt7TZpMasZZIw1WclUq6IXH X-Received: by 10.194.238.163 with SMTP id vl3mr3588762wjc.169.1480014335606; Thu, 24 Nov 2016 11:05:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from [10.105.53.164] ([80.215.204.100]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id d184sm9682692wmd.8.2016.11.24.11.05.33 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 24 Nov 2016 11:05:34 -0800 (PST) From: Vincent Jardin To: Ed Warnicke CC: "O'Driscoll, Tim" , Matt Spencer , Thomas Monjalon , Dave Neary , Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2016 20:05:32 +0100 Message-ID: <15897ba8060.27fc.bb328046f2889bc8f44aafa891a44dd2@6wind.com> In-Reply-To: References: <26FA93C7ED1EAA44AB77D62FBE1D27BA67622717@IRSMSX108.ger.corp.intel.com> <583617A4.4000400@redhat.com> <26FA93C7ED1EAA44AB77D62FBE1D27BA67623D9E@IRSMSX108.ger.corp.intel.com> <1540534.G53vByIeVs@xps13> <26FA93C7ED1EAA44AB77D62FBE1D27BA67623FF8@IRSMSX108.ger.corp.intel.com> <1589784a738.27fc.bb328046f2889bc8f44aafa891a44dd2@6wind.com> User-Agent: AquaMail/1.6.2.9 (build: 27000209) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----------15897ba836a778527fc7c88de4" Subject: Re: [dpdk-moving] Reminder on Today's Meeting and Updated Charter X-BeenThere: moving@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK community structure changes List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2016 19:05:36 -0000 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------------15897ba836a778527fc7c88de4 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Again: please explain in case of *BSD OSes ? Le 24 novembre 2016 19:20:03 Ed Warnicke a écrit : > Speaking as someone who's been involved in thousands of discussions over > more than a decade evaluating issues like patent risk in consuming open > source software, I don't see a patent clause in a CLA offering any > realistic assurance to a downstream consumer. > > Were I involved in a discussion around patent risk in DPDK, I would point > to its license. > > That said (and keeping in mind that IANAL), I do *not* see any patent > protection in the BSD license similar to what one sees in the Apache 2 > license, or the Eclipse Public License. Please note: I am not advocating > here for a license change, just drawing attention to my perspective as > someone who's been deeply involved in such things for a long time. > > Ed > > On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 12:07 PM, Vincent Jardin > wrote: > >> Matt, >> >> Please explain why you think that contributions under BSD licenses are not >> proper contributions for patents. For instance, Free/Net/OpenBSD do not >> require any CLA so contribution process remains smooth. >> >> Thank you, >> >> >> >> ------------15897ba836a778527fc7c88de4 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

Again: please explain in case of *BSD OSes ?

Le 24 novembre 2016 19:20:03 Ed Warnicke <hagbard@gmail.com> a écrit :

Speaking as someone who's been involved in thousands of discussions over more than a decade evaluating issues like patent risk in consuming open source software, I don't see a patent clause in a CLA offering any realistic assurance to a downstream consumer.

Were I involved in a discussion around patent risk in DPDK, I would point to its license.

That said (and keeping in mind that IANAL), I do *not* see any patent protection in the BSD license similar to what one sees in the Apache 2 license, or the Eclipse Public License.  Please note: I am not advocating here for a license change, just drawing attention to my perspective as someone who's been deeply involved in such things for a long time.

Ed

On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 12:07 PM, Vincent Jardin <vincent.jardin@6wind.com> wrote:
Matt,

Please explain why you think that contributions under BSD licenses are not proper contributions for patents. For instance, Free/Net/OpenBSD do not require any CLA so contribution process remains smooth.

Thank you,




------------15897ba836a778527fc7c88de4--