www-legal-discuss mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Chris A. Mattmann (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] [Comment Edited] (LEGAL-303) RocksDB Integrations
Date Fri, 09 Jun 2017 22:00:26 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-303?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16045097#comment-16045097
] 

Chris A. Mattmann edited comment on LEGAL-303 at 6/9/17 10:00 PM:
------------------------------------------------------------------

This specific language from the PATENTS file is troubling, but overall the whole file gives
me pause:

bq. For avoidance of doubt, no license is granted under Facebook’s rights in any patent
claims that are infringed by (i) modifications to the Software made by you or any third party
or (ii) the Software incombination with any software or other technology.

In addition in answer to your questions:

bq. Can we rewrite storage engine to use RocksDB as it's only option? Seems like answer here
is no

Correct

bq. Can we rewrite storage engine to have two options, one RocksDB and another native Cassandra,
with both in tree, but requiring the user to opt in to the more restrictive patent?

No

bq. Can we rewrite the storage engine to have two options, one RocksDB and another native
Cassandra, with RocksDB kept in another repo , requiring explicit action to opt in and built
as separate binary package?

Yes, as long as that "other" repo exists somewhere outside the ASF.

bq. If so, can that repo / binary be hosted on ASF hardware and built by the apache Cassandra
team, or must it be completely external?

Completely external.




was (Author: chrismattmann):
This specific language from the PATENTS file is troubling, but overall the whole file gives
me pause:

bq. For avoidance of doubt, no license is granted under
Facebook’s rights in any patent claims that are infringed by (i) modifications
to the Software made by you or any third party or (ii) the Software in
combination with any software or other technology.

In addition in answer to your questions:

bq. Can we rewrite storage engine to use RocksDB as it's only option? Seems like answer here
is no

Correct

bq. Can we rewrite storage engine to have two options, one RocksDB and another native Cassandra,
with both in tree, but requiring the user to opt in to the more restrictive patent?

No

bq. Can we rewrite the storage engine to have two options, one RocksDB and another native
Cassandra, with RocksDB kept in another repo , requiring explicit action to opt in and built
as separate binary package?

Yes, as long as that "other" repo exists somewhere outside the ASF.

bq. If so, can that repo / binary be hosted on ASF hardware and built by the apache Cassandra
team, or must it be completely external?

Completely external.



> RocksDB Integrations
> --------------------
>
>                 Key: LEGAL-303
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-303
>             Project: Legal Discuss
>          Issue Type: Question
>            Reporter: Jeff Jirsa
>
> Hi Legal,
> There's a hypothetical question on the Apache Cassandra mailing list about potentially
expanding Cassandra's storage to be pluggable, specifically using RocksDB.
> RocksDB has a 3 clause BSD license (
> https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb/blob/master/LICENSE ), and a patent
> grant ( https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb/blob/master/PATENTS )
> I know the 3 clause BSD license is fine, but is the wording of the patent grant problematic?

> cc [~dikanggu]



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org


Mime
View raw message