Timeline for Is open source license compatible with a patent-encumbered standard?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
7 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 14, 2019 at 7:56 | history | edited | MadHatter♦ | CC BY-SA 4.0 | edited body |
| Jun 4, 2019 at 19:01 | comment | added | MadHatter♦ | @BartvanIngenSchenau thanks for that - I wish its README.md file were as clear. In that case, I'm not quite sure what EOG's problem is - it can't be the absence of a patent licence, though it might well be something else. | |
| Jun 4, 2019 at 17:22 | comment | added | Bart van Ingen Schenau | @MadHatter, libheif is licensed under LGPLv3+ according to both the COPYING file and a random sample of the copyright headers in the files. | |
| Jun 4, 2019 at 13:46 | comment | added | MadHatter♦ | Indeed, hence my point above about the [L]GPLv3 grant not being helpful if the author doesn't hold any of the patents in question. | |
| Jun 4, 2019 at 13:44 | comment | added | amon | even though the more robust open source licenses include a patent grant, this can only affect patents held by contributors or users. It does not affect patent-wielding third parties. So using even GPLv3 software may not be safe if it is encumbered by third party patents. | |
| Jun 4, 2019 at 12:05 | vote | accept | William | ||
| Jun 4, 2019 at 11:53 | history | answered | MadHatter♦ | CC BY-SA 4.0 |