This has been discussed quite a bit on the OSI license-discuss list. The
problem is that this has a hole so big you can drive a truck through it:
imagine someone who wants to cause harm to a patent-holder releasing a
library that implements their patent as open-source-licensed software.
The patent holder, especially if they are an Apache contributor, now has a
pyhrric choice: lose all their patents, or stop using Apache-licensed
software. Unless the ASF's political mission includes "destroy all
patents", which it does not, it is not in our favor to ask companies to
choose between using Apache and being able to enforce their patents.
Brian
On Tue, 11 Nov 2003, Paul Johnson wrote:
> I've looked at the proposed Apache License 2.0, and I'd like to suggest
> that you extend the patent defence clause to withdraw the license from
> anyone who tries to enforce a patent against *any* open source software.
>
> Open source software can be defined as any software available under a
> license approved by the Open Source Institute.
>
> If most open source software were licensed to include such clauses then
> anyone contemplating patent action against open source software would
> have to contemplate replacing open source software used anywhere in
> their organisation, and permanently losing the option of switching to
> open source solutions in the future. This would be a mighty stick to
> beat potential litigants. Individual defence clauses of the sort
> currently proposed (and common in Mozilla-style licenses) have the
> failing that only the package under attack is withdrawn. So a patent
> holder could sue one project while still continuing to use all other
> open source software.
>
> Paul.
