Re: XOrg vs XFree86

["Michael A. Peters" <mpeters mac com>]

On Wed, 2004-03-31 at 23:07, T. Ribbrock wrote:

> 
> > > as Apache's licence has been changed for the worse as well.
> 
> > With respect to GPL compatibility Apache's license hasn't changed.  It
> > never has been GPL compatible.
> 
> The problem is that the old licence was reasonably understandable,
> whereas the new licence can only be understood with the help of a
> lawyer. In my opinion, this is a clear change for the worse.

The problem I see is even worse.
Now I'm not a lawyer - but it looks like you have a patented technology,
Apache uses your patented tech, and you sue Apache.org - then you are no
longer allowed to use Apache.

In other words - buy using Apache, you agree that we may use any technology
you have patented free of charge. That's not free.

Thus - if say they started using something from Red Hat's patent portfolio
and Red Hat took them to court over it - Red Hat would not be allowed to
use Apache.

I'm not in favor of patent licenses - but that is definitely not free.
I see Apache's market share dropping soon, and something (maybe bases on
thttpd?) replacing it.

Then again - I'm not a lawyer, so maybe I don't understand their license.
I can, however, understand the bsd license, the gpl license, the perl
artistic license, etc.