tbh i am skeptical of zstandard because they stopped giving people a patent grant for it
Conversation
Replying to
It's included in the Linux System Definition, no?
openinventionnetwork.com/linux-system/t
2
Not really comparable to the patent grant. It's part of why Apache 2 is clearly the best license...
apache.org/licenses/LICEN
Explicit patent grant, explicitly states contributions are made available under Apache 2 (without needing CLA) and that trademarks are a separate thing.
2
1
The patent grant applied to any use of the software including in proprietary software. It's not much of a permissive license if you can't actually use it permissively due to patents. OIN is based around Linux specifically which is a lot different and even somewhat harmful.
the larger reason, imo that OIN is problematic is because it legitimizes the view that software patents are somehow acceptable and should be a thing. we should be looking to abolish software patents in all forms.
1
3
Copyright very narrowly avoided being a potentially even more serious issue in the US with the whole Java API case. Definitely not completely resolved since it wasn't determined that APIs aren't copyrightable and fair use has to be decided on a case-by-case basis.
1
Show replies
Apache 2 is really nice since it's basically the MIT or 3-clause BSD license but explicitly dealing with patents, trademarks and contributions.
Software patents are bad enough that it's in the interest of companies like Google with a huge amount of them to fight against them.
1
1
At the moment, Google is against software patents and they use Apache 2 for almost everything that's not a fork of an existing project. Could change though, since they own a ridiculous amount of patents and keep acquiring more. Facebook seemed to have a similar position before...