[antlr-interest] submission of patches, fixes, other contributions
Gerald B. Rosenberg
gbr at newtechlaw.com
Mon May 30 19:34:01 PDT 2005
Lots of good discussion. There are, however, a number of issues that
should not be glazed over too quickly:
First off, be aware that Terence's initial query specifically concerned an
contributor's license agreement. Licenses such as the BSD, AFL and EPL are
structured for use by an entity like the Antlr Project to license out
aggregated contributions. The suggestion to consider the JCA is a good one.
Even if applicable, be aware that the BSD, AFL and EPL are really very
different in the areas significant to Terence. While short and neat, the
BSD license leaves many issues completely un-addressed.
The AFL was purposefully designed to be comprehensive to the issues, but it
purposefully puts the entire risk and liability of error on the
licensor/distributor. Given that it is a "free" license, the licensor is
not collecting anything of economic value that could be used to cover this
accumulated risk. Under the AFL, even a threat of litigation would likely
be sufficient, in a practical sense, to shutter an open source vendor.
Conversely, the EPL places the entire risk on the end user -- the people at
the greatest distance and with the least knowledge and often the least
ability to exercise recourse for anything wrongfully contributed. As
Terence has experienced, large(r) corporations particularly do not like
these types of licenses (for software they are licensing in) due to the
burden and uncertainty of even attempting to verify the original
contributions.
The questions raised about the warrantee/indemnity clause have caused
Terence to question keeping it. The suggestion is that it is
chilling. Well, actually, I believe that is a good thing. The great
strength of the open source community are the contributors. Not just in
terms of the nature and quality of the software they produce, but also of
their awareness of the larger business issues and willingness to discuss,
evaluate, and educate others in them.
With free software, it is almost by definition impossible to balance
economic risk. Therefore, the one best place to prevent the contribution
of legally encumbered code is at the very outset. Anyone not savvy or
experienced enough to understand the consequences of a particular
contribution should be cautioned to raise the appropriate questions prior
to making the contribution. To that end, Terence's warrantee clause is
appropriate.
(Yes, I am a lawyer. No, this should not be taken as specific legal
advise. Yes, I am a user of Antlr. No, I do not represent Antlr, etc.)
Best,
Gerald
----
Gerald B. Rosenberg, Esq.
NewTechLaw
285 Hamilton Avenue, Suite 520
Palo Alto, CA 94301-2576
650.325.2100 (office) / 650.703.1724 (cell)
650.325.2107 (fax)
www.newtechlaw.com
More information about the antlr-interest
mailing list