Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sun 17th Jul 2011 20:58 UTC, submitted by fran
Linux It's strange. Microsoft has been patent trolling the heck out of the Linux kernel for a long time now, and is still using these patents against Android today in its protection money scheme. However, as illustrates, Microsoft makes quite a few contributions to the Linux kernel. Shouldn't this invalidate their patent claims?
Permalink for comment 481335
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
by malxau on Sun 17th Jul 2011 21:24 UTC
Member since:

Shouldn't this invalidate their patent claims?

The Linux kernel is licensed under GPLv2.

GPLv2 does contain a clause to ensure redistributors do not obtain a patent license that cannot be reapplied to every user receiving a copy.

It does not contain the GPLv3 patent license requirements (section 11) that are applied to contributors. Those provisions are attempting to give effect to what you describe, where a contributor must implicitly be granting a patent license to any applicable patents they hold that would cover their contribution.

Notwithstanding that, if a GPLv3-style patent license did exist covering the Linux kernel as a result of contributions, it does not mean that any patent claims over a larger work (eg. Android) would entirely be invalidated; only those relating to the kernel contributions. Many of the patents being argued about are much higher level than that.

Reply Score: 5