Changes between Version 3 and Version 4 of ApertureLicense

Timestamp:

10/10/05 20:37:59 (19 years ago)

Author:

anonymous

Comment:

--

ApertureLicense

@@ -19 +19 @@
 '''Limited reciprocity''' - on the other hand, if you create your own components that are to be placed inside the framework, e.g. an Extractor for a proprietary document format, you should not be required to make this available to the community. Rationale: this code may necessarily contain trade secrets and you don't want to scare away such users. Also, people seem to have a natural tendency for more generically applicable component to make them available to the project team, if only because they get free expert feedback and, once incorporated into the project, free code maintainance.
 
-'''Build-in patent license''' - when you contribute code to the project, you automatically give people a royalty-free parent license for using that code, in case the code would otherwise infringe one of your patents. This prevents contributors from contributing code and coming back later to collect royalties. This patent license should be formulated in a fair way, e.g. should cover both Aperture and derivative works.
+'''Built-in patent license''' - when you contribute code to the project, you automatically give people a royalty-free parent license for using that code, in case the code would otherwise infringe one of your patents. This prevents contributors from contributing code and coming back later to collect royalties. This patent license should be formulated in a fair way, e.g. should cover both Aperture and derivative works.
+
+'''Built-in patent defense''' - when you sue someone (either a developer or a user) for a patent infringement related to this code, all your rights (patent- and copyright-related) for this codebase should be withdrawn. This defense should be formulated in a fair way, e.g. it should not involve infringements by a contributor outside this project.
 
 == To Discuss ==