Slashdot Mirror
Nokia Announces Patent Support to the Linux Kernel
Mictian writes "In conjunction with the introduction of Nokia's Linux Handheld mentioned earlier today, Nokia Corporation announced today that it allows all its patents to be used in the further development of the Linux Kernel. Nokia says, that it believes that open source software communities, like open standards, foster innovation and make an important contribution to the creation and rapid adaptation of technologies. And that the investment made by so many individuals and companies in creating and developing the Linux Kernel and other open source software deserve a framework of certainty."
Actually, it does, simply because the GPL does not say anything about patents at all - remember that copyright and patents are two *very* distinct things.
One might argue that the GPL's prohibition of "further restrictions" applies to patents, so maybe you can't take a piece of GPL'ed software and add code to it that you have a patent on (assuming that you release the new version at all, of course), but IANAL, and it's wholly unclear to me ATM whether that really would be true or not.
But outside of that, there's nothing in the GPL that deals with patents (unless I overlooked something important, of course, but that goes without saying).
quidquid latine dictum sit altum videtur.
AFAIK the GPL refers to copyright on code, not patents. However code that contains an implementation of a patented process, method, etc., may run into problems, at least in certain jurdisdictions, that would make distribution under the GPL difficult or impossible. But the patent itself cannot be GPLed or anything like that.
As I read it it means that anything that is infringing now in the kernel is fine, and those same infringements in future kernels are also fine, but that new things introduced into the kernel may or may not be fine.
Legally Binding Commitment Not to Assert Nokia Patents against the Linux Kernel
Patent Statement
Nokia hereby commits not to assert any of its Patents (as defined herein below) against any Linux Kernel (as defined herein below) existing as of 25 May 2005. The aforesaid non-assertion shall extend to any future Linux Kernel to the extent that Nokia does not declare any new functionality embodied in such Linux Kernel to be outside the scope of this Patent Statement. Nokia shall issue such declaration through its website no later than one hundred and twenty (120) days after the official release of such Linux Kernel.
Both of the aforesaid non-assertion commitments are subject to the condition that the party relying on any such commitment and its Affiliates do not assert any of their patents, or patents they control or have a third party assert any patent, against any Linux Kernel.
Nokia's Patent Statement is not an assurance that any of its Patents validly covers the Linux Kernel, is enforceable, or that the Linux Kernel does not infringe patents or other intellectual property rights of any third party.
No other rights except those expressly stated in this Patent Statement shall be deemed granted or received by implication, or estoppel, or otherwise.
Definitions:
"Affiliate"
of a party means any legal entity greater than fifty percent (50%) of whose outstanding shares or securities representing the right to vote for the election of directors or other managing authority are, or greater than fifty percent (50%) of whose equity interest is, now or hereafter, owned or controlled, directly or indirectly by that party, but only as long as such ownership or control exists.
"Nokia"
means Nokia Corporation and its Affiliates.
"Linux Kernel"
means any version of the Linux kernel which (i) is released as "stable version", (ii) is licensed under the "GNU GENERAL PUBLIC LICENSE Version 2, June 1991 for the Linux operating system" and (iii) has been published by the Kernel.org Organization, Inc on its Linux Kernel Archive website at www.kernel.org.
"Patent"
means any such claims, including without limitation, method and product claims, of any and all patents and patent applications with a priority date of 31 December 2005 or earlier, now owned or hereafter acquired by Nokia, which are infringed by any Linux Kernel that exists as of 25 May 2005 or by any functionality embodied in any future Linux Kernel to the extent that Nokia has not declared as described hereinabove such functionality to be outside the scope of this Patent Statement. For the avoidance of doubt, Patent shall not include any claims for enabling technologies that are not themselves embodied in the Linux Kernel (e.g., without limitation, hardware or semiconductor manufacturing technology as such).
If religous zealots don't believe in Evolution, then why are they so worried about bird flu?
I think that's not quite true. I think that Nokia has declared that all current infringements are ok, but future infringements are going to be looked at case by case, with the expectation (no guarantees!) that they'll be ok'd.
They lead off with:
This is a long way from what we need, which is a non-revokable license for use in all GPL'd software. Still, the little they are giving us is non-revokable (I think), and it's more than they had to give us.
There's really not much to touch. It boils down to: ``We won't sue Linus for anything he's done so far.'' There's no requirement for Linus (or anybody else) to reciprocate in any way.
See what I've been reading.
I attended a lecture on innovation management by an individual responsible for it at Nokia and he said that their view is pretty much that "we're in the business of innovation - not lawsuits" and said that their policy is to never take legal action against someone infringing their patents (i.e. the instructions to their lawyers is: If you start a patent lawsuit you're fired even if you're right). The reason why they use patents is only to protect themselves from lawsuits by others. And he had a quite good piece of advice for anyone considering patenting something: It's not worth it since by the time you've got twelve idiots deciding your fate you've got nothing left to win.
Sounds to me like Nokia is complying with the license rather than making some grand gesture.
PS - Yes the GPL does talk about patents.
Patents cover ideas, not code. The statement means that if Nokia has a concept patented that would be beneficial to have in the kernel, the developers can write it and include it without fear of litigation. The fact that this is a concern in the first place is the basis for the outcries against software patents.
And I quote:
And from the preamble (which is a required part of the GPL text for inclusion in programs, though I'm not sure whether it's considered a binding part of the contract):
That is, once a patent is freely licensed in accordance with the GPL, it must be possible to use that patent for derivative works as well, including future versions of the Linux kernel. This flies in the face of "With respect to new functionality introduced into future Linux Kernel releases, Nokia reserves the right to declare that the Patent Statement shall not apply." It is not a free licensing of the patents involved as required by the GPL.
Not difficult.
_ protest/
Nokia seems absolutely pro-swpat. Their patent department has done lots of lobbying in conferences and in the European Parliament. We encountered the head of their IP department, Tim Frain, in Bournemouth in summer 2002. Participants at the conference easily demonstrated that his arguments are economic nonsense. http://swpat.ffii.org/gasnu/nokia/index.en.html
Campaigners are opposed by representatives from large companies, including Nokia, which the FFII reports is engaged in energetic Pro-Patent Lobbying Efforts. Nokia argues that software patents "provide incentives to undertake research and development in Europe, and to promote licensing and technology transfer". http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/04/13/eu_patent
Meanwhile, lobbyists in favour of software patents are also gearing up
for the fight. FFII has obtained a copy of a round-robin letter being
circulated by Nokia's Tim Frain (Nokia/Southwood) and Dany Ducoulombier
(Nokia/Brussels) for pro-patent signatures before April 8th. The letter
calls on ministers to drop their objections, and to support a draft text
issued by the Irish Presidency on March 17th. http://lwn.net/Articles/79930/
why give them credit? what about openbsd and freebsd?
The BSD license allows the code to be used in proprietary closed-source software where Nokia wouldn't be able to make much use of it. It just doesn't make much sense to a commercial undertaking like Nokia to engage in this sort of "I give and my competitors take take take" licensing.
With the GPL the code can be used inhouse by others without distributing it but it can't be used as the basis of a competitors closed product. If the competitor is willing to release their code under the GPL then it adds into the overall pool that Nokia can draw upon.
I suspect Alan is fairly au fait with the GPL - you're missing his point.
The GPL says: "[..] if a patent license would not permit royalty-free redistribution of the Program by all those who receive copies [..] through you, then the only way you could satisfy both it and this License would be to refrain entirely from distribution of the Program."
Nokia has to licence its patents, or people who receive the software through it are unable to redistribute that software. That would not satisfy the GPL, hence, they would not be able to distribute the software.
"Elmo knows where you live!" - The Simpsons