Skip to main content
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [microprofile-wg] Consensus thread on Implementation patent license vs Compatible patent license
+1 for Implementation Patent License (iJUG)

Why:
We have to make a decision about some sort of patent "peace contract" between Eclipse/MPWG Members (not the world) and we have to choose between a liberal variant (Implementation Patent License, IPL) or a narrower one (Compatible Patent Licence, CPL).

In an "Implementation First" approach process we think it is important to protect members and users of MicroProfile as early as possible during the process to prevent unnecessary lawsuits or blocking early adoption.
While from the patent protection view CPL is a subset of IPL, the usage of CPL within Jakarta EE as (current) default (there was no choice between two options at the time of defining the process and patent licence there) and IPL in MicroProfile is compatible.

Note:
In the EU software patents should not be allowed - while the practical truth of the EPA might be something different...

With my 5-minutes-attention to the topic I personally tended to CPL: As a technician I like deterministic behaviour with TCK proof instead or lawyers opinion.
With 30-minutes-attention I changed my mind, because I learned the patent licence is something different form the guarantee to have 100% compatibility of implementations to the specifications - the last one will be established due to run the TCK successfully and can be showed through TCK result and the allowed usage of the MP Compatibility Logo.

For the current contest for that logo it might be not enough to let the contributors sign the standard EF Contribution Agreement - as it guarantees non-exclusive use to the EF and not exclusive use (or grant by passing the TCK) of the MicroProfile Working Group?
But that´s another story ;-)

Disclaimer:
I am not a lawyer too :-)

Jan Westerkamp

PS: Many thanks to the attendees of the MicroProfile talk we had last week at JUG Darmstadt, where I had the chance to discuss this topic with them afterwards.


Am 26.05.21 um 20:58 schrieb David Blevins:
+1 for Implementation Patent License

We have a compatibility program we're building to motivate compliance.

For the Compatible Patent License: If an implementor viewed the legal risk as a motivator for being compliant, it would be seen by those same eyes as a motivator to not implement a spec before it is final.  We want people implementing specs early, before they are final, as that leads to the highest quality final product with the most implementations.  Getting an implementors feedback after a spec is final creates more opportunities for after-the-fact insights and potential for backwards incompatible changes.

-- 
David Blevins

On May 26, 2021, at 1:59 AM, John Clingan <jclingan@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

The MicroProfile Steering Committee needs to select its patent license. The ballot language requires verbiage that Steering Committee can vote on (+1,-1,0), and the two patent license verbiage options are outlined below. Here is a recent post by Mike Milinkovich on the patent license topic, and David wrote up an example. Neither claim to be lawyers :-)  The intellectual property policy is here (pdf).

While anyone can select their preferred patent license ballot option, only steering committee member selection will be counted towards the selected ballot language.  Once consensus is reached, the Steering Committee will conduct a ballot on the preferred option.

Please select the desired patent license:

Implementation Patent License
RESOLVED, the MicroProfile Steering Committee approves the use of the
Implementation Patent License as defined in the Eclipse Foundation Intellectual
Property Policy for all specifications under the purview of this Working Group.

or

Compatible Patent License
RESOLVED, the MicroProfile Steering Committee approves the use of the
Compatible Patent License as defined in the Eclipse Foundation Intellectual
Property Policy for all specifications under the purview of this Working Group.


_______________________________________________
microprofile-wg mailing list
microprofile-wg@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/microprofile-wg


_______________________________________________
microprofile-wg mailing list
microprofile-wg@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/microprofile-wg


Back to the top