On Wed, Aug 09, 2017 at 06:22:37PM -0400, Wheeler, David A wrote: > As far as I can tell SPDX currently has no way to report this > information.
There's some previous discussion in [1,2]. The current recommendation is to define a custom ID for the patent rider and use that [3], for example: BSD-3-Clause AND FB-Patents-2.0 > Since this rider could be applied to many different kinds of > licenses, and seems to normally be included as a separate file, I > think this should be listed as an exception. There's been recent discussion about what counts as an “exception” [4,5]. The currently favored wording limits exceptions to things that grant *additional* permissions. It's not clear to me if the Facebook/React patent rider meets that condition. I'm personally in favor of a less-opinionated operator for attaching riders, but this is probably not the right thread to re-open that discussion. > Then React's license would be "BSD-3-Clause WITH > ANY-PATENT-ASSERTION-TERMINATES-2.0", which I think is fairly clear. > > I made up the name. As far as I know this was created by Facebook, > but there's no reason to believe that it could only be used by > Facebook, so I thought it'd be better to focus on its effect. And the BSD licenses were originally by Berkeley, but folks commonly refer to them as BSD licenses, not “A-Short-Lax-Permissive-License” ;). Ideally the name would be compact, intuitive, and easily distinguished from other identifiers. Facebook-Patent-2.0 is compact and easily distinguished. Your proposal is more intuitive, but potentially less easily distinguished as the number of patent-related riders grows. And obviously folks can always pull up the full text if they have questions. Cheers, Trevor [1]: https://bugs.linuxfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1292 https://lists.spdx.org/pipermail/spdx-tech/2015-June/002717.html Subject: [Bug 1292] New: What is the correct license expression for a project with an additional patent license? Date: Mon Jun 15 03:58:53 UTC 2015 [2]: https://lists.spdx.org/pipermail/spdx-legal/2017-June/002008.html Subject: New OSI approved license Date: Sun Jun 4 03:47:02 UTC 2017 [3]: https://bugs.linuxfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1292#c2 [4]: https://lists.spdx.org/pipermail/spdx-legal/2017-July/002036.html Subject: revised wording for top of exceptions page Date: Thu, 6 Jul 2017 23:35:40 +0100 Message-Id: <5f1d2c18-6d14-4ccd-80d3-6008588bb...@jilayne.com> [5]: https://lists.spdx.org/pipermail/spdx-legal/2017-July/002078.html Subject: revised text for top of exceptions page Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2017 22:34:12 -0600 Message-Id: <cfc5fb98-bdec-47bc-b64c-47b1473e7...@jilayne.com> -- This email may be signed or encrypted with GnuPG (http://www.gnupg.org). For more information, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pretty_Good_Privacy
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Spdx-legal mailing list Spdx-legal@lists.spdx.org https://lists.spdx.org/mailman/listinfo/spdx-legal
