[openssl-dev] The new OpenSSL license should be made GPLv2 compatible

[Florian Weimer]

* James Bottomley:

> On Sat, 2017-03-25 at 16:10 +0000, Salz, Rich via openssl-dev wrote:
>>  
>> > Please, in the final OpenSSL license text add the paragraph linked 
>> > in the above LLVM mailing list as an exception to the Apache
>> > license.
>> > 
>> > We should make sure using OpenSSL in GPLv2-only projects its 
>> > possible without any trouble or concern for developers.
>> 
>> The problem is that if it is distributed under the GPLv2 there is no
>> patent protection, and that is important to us.
>
> I've already told you once that this is a factually incorrect statement
> because (L)GPLv2 contains an implicit patent licence:

I think the fact that Richard rejects dual licensing indicates that
it's not the lack of a licence that concerns him, but something else.
He calls it “patent protection”; I assume he refers to the weak
mutually assured destruction clause in the Apache license (the “If You
institute patent litigation against any entity” part).

I don't think the GPL, version 2, contains anything remote close to
*that*, implied or otherwise.