[redland-dev] Re: Redland license changes (Proposed)

[Dirk-Willem van Gulik]

On Fri, 27 Aug 2004, Dave Beckett wrote:

> So why not Apache 2.0 alone?  There is still a dispute if it is
> compatible with the GPL, and until the FSF and the ASF both agree
> that they are compatible, I will be including explicit GPL
> compatibility by using the LGPL 2.1.

Do not expect this to be resolved too soon; the main sticking point
consists of two things: an additional right that the ASL gives you in
section 3:

   3. Grant of Patent License. Subject to the terms and conditions of
      this License, each Contributor hereby grants to You a perpetual,
      worldwide, non-exclusive, no-charge, royalty-free, irrevocable
      ...

and an additional thing it takes away: it has certain patent termination
clause:

      ... If You
      institute patent litigation against any entity (including a
      cross-claim or counterclaim in a lawsuit) alleging that the Work
      or a Contribution incorporated within the Work constitutes direct
      or contributory patent infringement, then any patent licenses
      granted to You under this License for that Work shall terminate
      as of the date such litigation is filed.

which the (L)GPL does not yet have. Though this is apparently worked on
within the FSF - it was just ill timing which got them out of sync. The
FSF does not think those patent termination cases are inherently a bad
idea, but nonetheless they are incompatible with the GNU GPL in its
current/old 1991 version.

Dw.