Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 14 Jan 2003 20:55:56 +0900 | From | Bruce Harada <> | Subject | Re: IPMI |
| |
On Tue, 14 Jan 2003 20:23:07 +1100 Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org> wrote:
> > This document describes how to use the IPMI driver for Linux. If you > > are not familiar with IPMI itself, see the web site at > > http://www.intel.com/design/servers/ipmi/index.htm. IPMI is a big > > subject and I can't cover it all here!
I don't want to start a license flamewar, by any means, but while looking through that page I noticed this:
"Adopters Agreement:
Before implementing the IPMI, IPMB or ICMB specifications, a royalty-free reciprocal patent license must be signed."
The agreement itself (at http://www.intel.com/design/servers/ipmi/adopterslicense.pdf) seems benign (where 'seems' means 'I am not a lawyer and I don't even play one on TV'), but this bit looks a little iffy:
| Adopter hereby grants to the Promoters and to Fellow Adopters, and the | Promoters hereby grant to Adopter, a nonexclusive, royalty-free, | nontransferable, nonsublicenseable, worldwide | license under its Necessary Claims to make, have made, use, import, | offer to sell and sell products which comply with the Specification
How does the "nontransferable, nonsublicensable" bit affect Linux? I presume somebody signed this thing and sent it to Intel, but wouldn't it only apply to the individual who signed it, as Linux developers aren't exactly a legal entity? The way I read it, it would mean that everybody who wants to distribute a kernel containing IPMI would each need to sign the agreement...
Much as I hate to say it, have you had a GPL-aware lawyer look at this?
Sorry for the noise,
Bruce
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |