ARM contributing to libc++ & libc++abi

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
10 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

ARM contributing to libc++ & libc++abi

Arnaud A. de Grandmaison

We (ARM) intend to contribute to libc++ and libc++abi.

 

However, in order to do that, we would first need to add a ‘NOTICE.TXT’ file at the root of each of these projects which would contain:

 

===================

Patent agreement notice to LLVM users in accordance with Paragraph 2 of LLVM

Developer Policy, Patents subsection:

 

Presently, ARM is unaware of any patents that would read on its LLVM

contributions. Nonetheless, to avoid doubt with respect to patent rights,

ARM hereby grants recipients of the software distributed by LLVM a perpetual,

worldwide, non-exclusive, no-charge, royalty-free, irrevocable patent license

to make, have made, use, offer to sell, sell, import, and otherwise transfer

software distributed by LLVM, where such license applies only to those patent

claims licensable by ARM that are necessarily infringed by ARM's contributions.

This patent license applies in addition to the University of Illinois/NCSA Open

Source License.

 

Please direct all inquiries regarding this agreement to:

  General Counsel, ARM Ltd.,110 Fulbourn Rd., Cambridge, CB1 9NJ, GB UK

===================

 

This does not change any licensing terms; it essentially helps limit any patent claims on ARM that may arise from our contributions, just to those which may be explicitly infringed by ARM’s contributions.

 

Do you think this proposal is acceptable ?

 

Cheers,

--

Arnaud A. de Grandmaison

 


_______________________________________________
cfe-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: ARM contributing to libc++ & libc++abi

Joerg Sonnenberger
On Mon, Dec 01, 2014 at 02:30:24PM +0100, Arnaud A. de Grandmaison wrote:
> However, in order to do that, we would first need to add a 'NOTICE.TXT' file
> at the root of each of these projects which would contain:

I would mirror the LICENSE.TXT and call it PATENTS.TXT. Modulo paragraph
wrapping, it sounds fine to me.

Joerg
_______________________________________________
cfe-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: ARM contributing to libc++ & libc++abi

Chandler Carruth
In reply to this post by Arnaud A. de Grandmaison
There is a LICENSE.txt in the ARM target of LLVM with similar but different text.

Is there a reason why these are different?

On Mon, Dec 1, 2014 at 5:30 AM, Arnaud A. de Grandmaison <[hidden email]> wrote:

We (ARM) intend to contribute to libc++ and libc++abi.

 

However, in order to do that, we would first need to add a ‘NOTICE.TXT’ file at the root of each of these projects which would contain:

 

===================

Patent agreement notice to LLVM users in accordance with Paragraph 2 of LLVM

Developer Policy, Patents subsection:

 

Presently, ARM is unaware of any patents that would read on its LLVM

contributions. Nonetheless, to avoid doubt with respect to patent rights,

ARM hereby grants recipients of the software distributed by LLVM a perpetual,

worldwide, non-exclusive, no-charge, royalty-free, irrevocable patent license

to make, have made, use, offer to sell, sell, import, and otherwise transfer

software distributed by LLVM, where such license applies only to those patent

claims licensable by ARM that are necessarily infringed by ARM's contributions.

This patent license applies in addition to the University of Illinois/NCSA Open

Source License.

 

Please direct all inquiries regarding this agreement to:

  General Counsel, ARM Ltd.,110 Fulbourn Rd., Cambridge, CB1 9NJ, GB UK

===================

 

This does not change any licensing terms; it essentially helps limit any patent claims on ARM that may arise from our contributions, just to those which may be explicitly infringed by ARM’s contributions.

 

Do you think this proposal is acceptable ?

 

Cheers,

--

Arnaud A. de Grandmaison

 


_______________________________________________
cfe-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev



_______________________________________________
cfe-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: ARM contributing to libc++ & libc++abi

Arnaud A. de Grandmaison

There are 2 main reasons for them to be different:

- libc++ does not touch as much our core business as a target: instruction sets, architecture and micro-architecture, …

- our legal people are getting more used to open source and feel (a bit) more comfortable: they have been able to come up with something short and which looks understandable to “normal” people.

 

Cheers,

Arnaud

 

From: Chandler Carruth [mailto:[hidden email]]
Sent: 02 December 2014 00:15
To: Arnaud De Grandmaison
Cc: cfe-dev Developers; Marshall Clow
Subject: Re: [cfe-dev] ARM contributing to libc++ & libc++abi

 

There is a LICENSE.txt in the ARM target of LLVM with similar but different text.

 

Is there a reason why these are different?

 

On Mon, Dec 1, 2014 at 5:30 AM, Arnaud A. de Grandmaison <[hidden email]> wrote:

We (ARM) intend to contribute to libc++ and libc++abi.

 

However, in order to do that, we would first need to add a ‘NOTICE.TXT’ file at the root of each of these projects which would contain:

 

===================

Patent agreement notice to LLVM users in accordance with Paragraph 2 of LLVM

Developer Policy, Patents subsection:

 

Presently, ARM is unaware of any patents that would read on its LLVM

contributions. Nonetheless, to avoid doubt with respect to patent rights,

ARM hereby grants recipients of the software distributed by LLVM a perpetual,

worldwide, non-exclusive, no-charge, royalty-free, irrevocable patent license

to make, have made, use, offer to sell, sell, import, and otherwise transfer

software distributed by LLVM, where such license applies only to those patent

claims licensable by ARM that are necessarily infringed by ARM's contributions.

This patent license applies in addition to the University of Illinois/NCSA Open

Source License.

 

Please direct all inquiries regarding this agreement to:

  General Counsel, ARM Ltd.,110 Fulbourn Rd., Cambridge, CB1 9NJ, GB UK

===================

 

This does not change any licensing terms; it essentially helps limit any patent claims on ARM that may arise from our contributions, just to those which may be explicitly infringed by ARM’s contributions.

 

Do you think this proposal is acceptable ?

 

Cheers,

--

Arnaud A. de Grandmaison

 


_______________________________________________
cfe-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev

 


_______________________________________________
cfe-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: ARM contributing to libc++ & libc++abi

Marshall Clow
In reply to this post by Arnaud A. de Grandmaison

On Dec 1, 2014, at 5:30 AM, Arnaud A. de Grandmaison <[hidden email]> wrote:

We (ARM) intend to contribute to libc++ and libc++abi.
 
However, in order to do that, we would first need to add a ‘NOTICE.TXT’ file at the root of each of these projects which would contain:
 
===================
Patent agreement notice to LLVM users in accordance with Paragraph 2 of LLVM
Developer Policy, Patents subsection:
 
Presently, ARM is unaware of any patents that would read on its LLVM
contributions. Nonetheless, to avoid doubt with respect to patent rights,
ARM hereby grants recipients of the software distributed by LLVM a perpetual,
worldwide, non-exclusive, no-charge, royalty-free, irrevocable patent license
to make, have made, use, offer to sell, sell, import, and otherwise transfer
software distributed by LLVM, where such license applies only to those patent
claims licensable by ARM that are necessarily infringed by ARM's contributions.
This patent license applies in addition to the University of Illinois/NCSA Open
Source License.
 
Please direct all inquiries regarding this agreement to:
  General Counsel, ARM Ltd.,110 Fulbourn Rd., Cambridge, CB1 9NJ, GB UK
===================
 
This does not change any licensing terms; it essentially helps limit any patent claims on ARM that may arise from our contributions, just to those which may be explicitly infringed by ARM’s contributions.
 
Do you think this proposal is acceptable ?

I’m OK with this. 
Not happy, because I think that this will lead to other companies wanting notices, but OK.

— Marshall



_______________________________________________
cfe-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: ARM contributing to libc++ & libc++abi

Sebastian Redl

On 02.12.2014 15:43, Marshall Clow wrote:

On Dec 1, 2014, at 5:30 AM, Arnaud A. de Grandmaison <[hidden email]> wrote:

We (ARM) intend to contribute to libc++ and libc++abi.
 
However, in order to do that, we would first need to add a ‘NOTICE.TXT’ file at the root of each of these projects which would contain:
 
===================
Patent agreement notice to LLVM users in accordance with Paragraph 2 of LLVM
Developer Policy, Patents subsection:
 
Presently, ARM is unaware of any patents that would read on its LLVM
contributions. Nonetheless, to avoid doubt with respect to patent rights,
ARM hereby grants recipients of the software distributed by LLVM a perpetual,
worldwide, non-exclusive, no-charge, royalty-free, irrevocable patent license
to make, have made, use, offer to sell, sell, import, and otherwise transfer
software distributed by LLVM, where such license applies only to those patent
claims licensable by ARM that are necessarily infringed by ARM's contributions.
"necessarily infringed"? Does that mean that if ARM contributes code that unnecessarily uses ARM-owned patents, people don't get the implicit license and are liable?
This does not change any licensing terms; it essentially helps limit any patent claims on ARM
Isn't the point to limit patent claims *by* ARM on users of LLVM? I don't see how this license would limit claims *on* ARM, nor why the project would care about that. Unless the lawyers have managed to corrupt the meaning of "on" in this case.

Sebastian

_______________________________________________
cfe-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: ARM contributing to libc++ & libc++abi

Arnaud A. de Grandmaison
In reply to this post by Marshall Clow

We understand your concern, and agree with you.

 

We believe this should be handled at the foundation level rather than with a “notice” per project. We are discussing this subject with the foundation, but it will take some time (several months) before anything is setup; we do not wish to delay our contributions by that much. We think of those “notice” as an intermediate step; once everything is in place with the foundation, they should be removed.

 

Best regards,

--

Arnaud

 

From: Marshall Clow [mailto:[hidden email]]
Sent: 02 December 2014 15:43
To: Arnaud De Grandmaison
Cc: cfe-dev Developers; Chandler Carruth
Subject: Re: ARM contributing to libc++ & libc++abi

 

 

On Dec 1, 2014, at 5:30 AM, Arnaud A. de Grandmaison <[hidden email]> wrote:

 

We (ARM) intend to contribute to libc++ and libc++abi.

 

However, in order to do that, we would first need to add a ‘NOTICE.TXT’ file at the root of each of these projects which would contain:

 

===================

Patent agreement notice to LLVM users in accordance with Paragraph 2 of LLVM

Developer Policy, Patents subsection:

 

Presently, ARM is unaware of any patents that would read on its LLVM

contributions. Nonetheless, to avoid doubt with respect to patent rights,

ARM hereby grants recipients of the software distributed by LLVM a perpetual,

worldwide, non-exclusive, no-charge, royalty-free, irrevocable patent license

to make, have made, use, offer to sell, sell, import, and otherwise transfer

software distributed by LLVM, where such license applies only to those patent

claims licensable by ARM that are necessarily infringed by ARM's contributions.

This patent license applies in addition to the University of Illinois/NCSA Open

Source License.

 

Please direct all inquiries regarding this agreement to:

  General Counsel, ARM Ltd.,110 Fulbourn Rd., Cambridge, CB1 9NJ, GB UK

===================

 

This does not change any licensing terms; it essentially helps limit any patent claims on ARM that may arise from our contributions, just to those which may be explicitly infringed by ARM’s contributions.

 

Do you think this proposal is acceptable ?

 

I’m OK with this. 

Not happy, because I think that this will lead to other companies wanting notices, but OK.

 

— Marshall

 

 


_______________________________________________
cfe-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: ARM contributing to libc++ & libc++abi

Arnaud A. de Grandmaison
In reply to this post by Sebastian Redl

 

> "necessarily infringed"? Does that mean that if ARM contributes code that unnecessarily uses ARM-owned patents, people don't get the implicit license and are liable?

[Caveat: I am not a lawyer] This wording can be found in many common CLA (contributor licence agreement). With my limited understanding of the patent parlance, this relates to a kind of transitivity between patents: people only get the licence for what is in the contribution; for example, the fact we contribute some code generation stuff (necessarily infringed) does not give people a licence on the target architecture (unnecessarily infringed).

 

> Isn't the point to limit patent claims *by* ARM on users of LLVM? I don't see how this license would limit claims *on* ARM, nor why the project would care about that. Unless the lawyers have managed to corrupt the meaning of "on" in this case.

[Caveat: I am not a lawyer] It removes doubts and clarifies the situation, at least for the lawyers, and this better protects users, LLVM and ARM. Users get the licence for what we contributed to LLVM,  but not to the complete patent portfolio. This ultimately benefits the LLVM project, which does not want to be in the middle of some patent madness.

 

Best regards,

--

Arnaud

 

 

From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Sebastian Redl
Sent: 02 December 2014 18:04
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [cfe-dev] ARM contributing to libc++ & libc++abi

 

 

On 02.12.2014 15:43, Marshall Clow wrote:

 

On Dec 1, 2014, at 5:30 AM, Arnaud A. de Grandmaison <[hidden email]> wrote:

 

We (ARM) intend to contribute to libc++ and libc++abi.

 

However, in order to do that, we would first need to add a ‘NOTICE.TXT’ file at the root of each of these projects which would contain:

 

===================

Patent agreement notice to LLVM users in accordance with Paragraph 2 of LLVM

Developer Policy, Patents subsection:

 

Presently, ARM is unaware of any patents that would read on its LLVM

contributions. Nonetheless, to avoid doubt with respect to patent rights,

ARM hereby grants recipients of the software distributed by LLVM a perpetual,

worldwide, non-exclusive, no-charge, royalty-free, irrevocable patent license

to make, have made, use, offer to sell, sell, import, and otherwise transfer

software distributed by LLVM, where such license applies only to those patent

claims licensable by ARM that are necessarily infringed by ARM's contributions.

"necessarily infringed"? Does that mean that if ARM contributes code that unnecessarily uses ARM-owned patents, people don't get the implicit license and are liable?

This does not change any licensing terms; it essentially helps limit any patent claims on ARM

Isn't the point to limit patent claims *by* ARM on users of LLVM? I don't see how this license would limit claims *on* ARM, nor why the project would care about that. Unless the lawyers have managed to corrupt the meaning of "on" in this case.

Sebastian


_______________________________________________
cfe-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: ARM contributing to libc++ & libc++abi

Richard Smith
In reply to this post by Arnaud A. de Grandmaison
On Mon, Dec 1, 2014 at 5:30 AM, Arnaud A. de Grandmaison <[hidden email]> wrote:

We (ARM) intend to contribute to libc++ and libc++abi.

 

However, in order to do that, we would first need to add a ‘NOTICE.TXT’ file at the root of each of these projects which would contain:

 

===================

Patent agreement notice to LLVM users in accordance with Paragraph 2 of LLVM

Developer Policy, Patents subsection:

 

Presently, ARM is unaware of any patents that would read on its LLVM

contributions. Nonetheless, to avoid doubt with respect to patent rights,

ARM hereby grants recipients of the software distributed by LLVM a perpetual,

worldwide, non-exclusive, no-charge, royalty-free, irrevocable patent license

to make, have made, use, offer to sell, sell, import, and otherwise transfer

software distributed by LLVM, where such license applies only to those patent

claims licensable by ARM that are necessarily infringed by ARM's contributions.

This patent license applies in addition to the University of Illinois/NCSA Open

Source License.

 

Please direct all inquiries regarding this agreement to:

  General Counsel, ARM Ltd.,110 Fulbourn Rd., Cambridge, CB1 9NJ, GB UK

===================

 

This does not change any licensing terms; it essentially helps limit any patent claims on ARM that may arise from our contributions, just to those which may be explicitly infringed by ARM’s contributions.

 

Do you think this proposal is acceptable ?


This does not seem like a question that cfe-dev is qualified to answer; according to http://llvm.org/docs/DeveloperPolicy.html#patents the right place to direct your email appears to be [hidden email].

_______________________________________________
cfe-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: ARM contributing to libc++ & libc++abi

Arnaud A. de Grandmaison

 

 

From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Richard Smith
Sent: 02 December 2014 22:05
To: Arnaud De Grandmaison
Cc: cfe-dev Developers; Marshall Clow
Subject: Re: [cfe-dev] ARM contributing to libc++ & libc++abi

 

On Mon, Dec 1, 2014 at 5:30 AM, Arnaud A. de Grandmaison <[hidden email]> wrote:

We (ARM) intend to contribute to libc++ and libc++abi.

 

However, in order to do that, we would first need to add a ‘NOTICE.TXT’ file at the root of each of these projects which would contain:

 

===================

Patent agreement notice to LLVM users in accordance with Paragraph 2 of LLVM

Developer Policy, Patents subsection:

 

Presently, ARM is unaware of any patents that would read on its LLVM

contributions. Nonetheless, to avoid doubt with respect to patent rights,

ARM hereby grants recipients of the software distributed by LLVM a perpetual,

worldwide, non-exclusive, no-charge, royalty-free, irrevocable patent license

to make, have made, use, offer to sell, sell, import, and otherwise transfer

software distributed by LLVM, where such license applies only to those patent

claims licensable by ARM that are necessarily infringed by ARM's contributions.

This patent license applies in addition to the University of Illinois/NCSA Open

Source License.

 

Please direct all inquiries regarding this agreement to:

  General Counsel, ARM Ltd.,110 Fulbourn Rd., Cambridge, CB1 9NJ, GB UK

===================

 

This does not change any licensing terms; it essentially helps limit any patent claims on ARM that may arise from our contributions, just to those which may be explicitly infringed by ARM’s contributions.

 

Do you think this proposal is acceptable ?

 

This does not seem like a question that cfe-dev is qualified to answer; according to http://llvm.org/docs/DeveloperPolicy.html#patents the right place to direct your email appears to be [hidden email].

 

 

Fair enough. By the way, this should probably be an email address at the foundation nowadays.

 

Given that we are already discussing with the foundation to put a CLA in place, they are probably the right people to have a final word on this intermediate step.

 

Best regards,

Arnaud


_______________________________________________
cfe-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev