www-legal-discuss mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Cliff Schmidt <cli...@apache.org>
Subject Re: CCLA: "by combination" language
Date Wed, 24 May 2006 20:58:28 GMT
Doug,

Sorry, but those changes would not be acceptable.   Specifically, the  
proposed wording, "the Work in its state at the time Your Contribution 
(s) were submitted" does not cover the intent of the CCLA as  
currently written.

Cliff

On May 23, 2006, at 3:41 PM, Doug Cutting wrote:

> Cliff Schmidt wrote:
>> I think you have the right idea of how the first part works, although
>> I might word it a little differently.
>
> I'm attaching a version of the CCLA modified by Yahoo!'s attorneys  
> to clarify this point.  Would there be a problem if Yahoo! files  
> this in place of the ordinary CCLA?
>
> I've attached a Microsoft Word document.  Open Office displays the  
> changes succinctly.  If this attachment fails to be transmitted, or  
> if anyone desires, I can instead send a plain text version,  
> although that might make it harder to highlight the specific  
> changes made.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Doug
>
>> On 4/4/06, Doug Cutting <cutting@apache.org> wrote:
>>> Yahoo! (my employer) would like to sign a CCLA, permitting  
>>> several more
>>> of its employees to contribute to Lucene Hadoop.  However  
>>> Yahoo!'s legal
>>> department has a concern about a clause in the "Grant of Patent  
>>> License"
>>> section.  The clause defines the patents in question to be those:
>>>
>>>       "[ ... ] infringed by Your Contribution(s)
>>>       alone or by combination of Your Contribution(s) with the  
>>> Work to
>>>       which such Contribution(s) were submitted."
>>>
>>> Yahoo! is concerned about the following scenario:
>>>
>>>   1. Yahoo! holds a patent.
>>>   2. Yahoo! contributes code, which, when combined with the existing
>>> code, does not infringe the patent.
>>>   3. Some other party contributes code which, combined with Yahoo!'s
>>> code, infringes Yahoo's patent.
>>>   4. Yahoo! is forced to stop litigation of this patent.
>>>
>>> My reading of the above clause does not permit this.  I read it as
>>> saying that patent litigation must only be stopped if:
>>>
>>>   1. Yahoo holds a patent.
>>>   2. Yahoo contributes code, which, combined with existing code, the
>>> patent is infringed.
>>>
>>> In other words, the infringement must be created by the  
>>> contribution at
>>> the time the the contribution is made.  In developer speak, the  
>>> commit
>>> of Yahoo's patch must be what makes the project infringe.  If a
>>> subsequent commit by another party causes the project to  
>>> infringe, then
>>> Yahoo! would not lose any rights to its patents.
>>>
>>> Which is the intended reading?  How can I clarify this to Yahoo!  
>>> legal?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> Doug
>>> <The Apache Software Foundation-CCLA-Yahoo Proposed Changes.doc>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> DISCLAIMER: Discussions on this list are informational and educational
> only.  Statements made on this list are not privileged, do not
> constitute legal advice, and do not necessarily reflect the opinions
> and policies of the ASF.  See <http://www.apache.org/licenses/> for
> official ASF policies and documents.
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org


---------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER: Discussions on this list are informational and educational
only.  Statements made on this list are not privileged, do not
constitute legal advice, and do not necessarily reflect the opinions
and policies of the ASF.  See <http://www.apache.org/licenses/> for
official ASF policies and documents.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org


Mime
View raw message