[openssl-dev] We're working on license changes

[Quanah Gibson-Mount]

--On Saturday, November 21, 2015 12:50 PM +0100 Kurt Roeckx 
<kurt at roeckx.be> wrote:



> I would like to point out that GPLv2 also isn't compatible with
> GPLv3, and that that is causing just as much problems as the
> current OpenSSL license.
>
> Both the GPLv3 and Apache 2.0 have protection for patents, which is
> why it's not compatible with the GPLv2.  If you look at the above
> page, they recommand the Apache 2.0 license instead of the MIT
> license just because of that.
>
> We are in a field were people do claim patents.  So the question
> is if this patent protection is important for us or not.

So the MPLv2 is compatible with the APLv2.  The MPLv2 is compatible with 
the GPLv2 and the APLv2 is copmatible with GPLv3.  The MPLv2 has patent 
language along the same lines as the APLv2.  I haven't looked into it and I 
am not a lawyer, but would it be possible to dual license via the MPLv2 and 
the APLv2?  If so, that would keep the patent protections and allow both 
GPLv2 and GPLv3 compatibility.

--Quanah

--

Quanah Gibson-Mount
Platform Architect
Zimbra, Inc.
--------------------
Zimbra ::  the leader in open source messaging and collaboration