Re: [next PATCH 0/5] net: tcp: DCTCP congestion control algorithm - IPR Patent Issue

Re: [next PATCH 0/5] net: tcp: DCTCP congestion control algorithm - IPR Patent Issue

[Hagen Paul Pfeifer]

On 13 May 2014 17:18, Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org> wrote:

> This is not enough to allow distribution under GPL.
> GPL has patent and redistribution clauses that as far as I know
> are not compatible.

Sure? IANAL, but as far as I know there is no such thing as "licence a
*patent* under the GPL". Furthermore, GPLv2 state: "To prevent this,
we have made it clear that any patent must be licensed for everyone's
free use or not licensed at all." - this is fulfilled in my opinion.

 I assume larger parts of the kernel are randomly covered by patents
to some degree. The "advantage" here is that we know for sure that we
can use this code without any potential patent claims (the good news
in a bad world).

But let other people decide if there is a problem with this particular IPR.


Hagen

Re: [next PATCH 0/5] net: tcp: DCTCP congestion control algorithm - IPR Patent Issue

[Stephen Hemminger]

On Tue, 13 May 2014 18:02:37 +0200
Hagen Paul Pfeifer <hagen@jauu.net> wrote:

> On 13 May 2014 17:18, Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org> wrote:
> 
> > This is not enough to allow distribution under GPL.
> > GPL has patent and redistribution clauses that as far as I know
> > are not compatible.
> 
> Sure? IANAL, but as far as I know there is no such thing as "licence a
> *patent* under the GPL". Furthermore, GPLv2 state: "To prevent this,
> we have made it clear that any patent must be licensed for everyone's
> free use or not licensed at all." - this is fulfilled in my opinion.
> 
>  I assume larger parts of the kernel are randomly covered by patents
> to some degree. The "advantage" here is that we know for sure that we
> can use this code without any potential patent claims (the good news
> in a bad world).
> 
> But let other people decide if there is a problem with this particular IPR.
> 
> 
> Hagen

IANAL but my understanding is that FRAND and GPL are not by nature directly
compatible. It is possible for do it but only if the entity claiming IPR
gives a free license to all GPL users. This is the case of the recent Cisco
PIE implementation for example.

Re: [next PATCH 0/5] net: tcp: DCTCP congestion control algorithm - IPR Patent Issue

[David Miller]

From: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>
Date: Tue, 13 May 2014 09:10:19 -0700

> IANAL but my understanding is that FRAND and GPL are not by nature directly
> compatible. It is possible for do it but only if the entity claiming IPR
> gives a free license to all GPL users. This is the case of the recent Cisco
> PIE implementation for example.

I am not even looking at this patch until this issue is resolved.

Please resubmit these changes at that point in time.