Go代码贡献:许可证和专利影响?

huangapple go评论88阅读模式
英文:

Go code contribution: license and patent implications?

问题

我一直在审查谷歌新语言的贡献文档,并对贡献新包的想法感到好奇。文档中指出,应将以下内容包含在贡献的源代码顶部:

// Copyright 2009 The Go Authors. All rights reserved.
// Use of this source code is governed by a BSD-style
// license that can be found in the LICENSE file.

我对BSD风格许可证的理解是,用户需要将代码归属于您,但可以做其他任何事情。

文档后面还提到:

如果您是版权持有人,您需要同意个人贡献者许可协议...

在个人贡献者许可协议中,谷歌声明对贡献的代码拥有可申请专利的权利:

您特此授予谷歌和谷歌分发的软件的接收者一项永久的、全球范围的、非独占的、免费的、无版税的、不可撤销的(除非本节另有规定)专利许可,用于制作、制造、使用、提供销售、销售、进口和以其他方式转让该作品,该许可仅适用于您的贡献单独或与您的贡献提交的作品组合而必然侵犯的专利权要求。

谷歌对Go的贡献拥有到什么程度的所有权?他们是否完全有权从这些贡献中获利?

英文:

I've been <a href="http://golang.org/pkg/">reviewing the contributions documentation for Google new language</a>, and was curious about the idea of contributing a new package. It states that this should be included at the top of contributed source code:

// Copyright 2009 The Go Authors. All rights reserved.
// Use of this source code is governed by a BSD-style
// license that can be found in the LICENSE file.

My understanding of a BSD-style license <a href="https://stackoverflow.com/questions/236699/what-open-source-license-to-choose">is that it essentially means that the user needs to attribute the code to you, but can do whatever else they want</a>.

Further down it says:

> If you are the copyright holder, you will need to agree to the individual contributor license agreement...

In the <a href="http://code.google.com/legal/individual-cla-v1.0.html">"individual contributor license agreement"</a>, it says that Google has patentable rights to the contributed code:

> You hereby grant to Google and to recipients of software distributed by Google a perpetual, worldwide, non-exclusive, no-charge, royalty-free, irrevocable (except as stated in this section) patent license to make, have made, use, offer to sell, sell, import, and otherwise transfer the Work, where such license applies only to those patent claims licensable by You that are necessarily infringed by Your Contribution(s) alone or by combination of Your Contribution(s) with the Work to which such Contribution(s) was submitted.

To what extent does Google own any Go contributions? Do they have full rights to profit from these contributions?

答案1

得分: 12

在多大程度上,谷歌拥有任何Go贡献?

您不需要将版权转让给谷歌。您仍然拥有版权。

您不需要将专利所有权转让给谷歌。您仍然拥有专利。

简而言之,谷歌不拥有他们之前没有拥有的任何知识产权。

但是,您确实授予谷歌无限制使用和分发您的贡献的权利,并授予下游人员使用的权利。第2条款涵盖版权,第3条款涵盖专利权。此外,您将此作为不可撤销的许可证授予(即您无法改变主意),并且是免费的。

他们是否完全有权从这些贡献中获利?

在法律或道德意义上,不存在所谓的“获利权”。因此,“完全有权从中获利”不是对您目前拥有的权利的有效描述。

通过授予谷歌非独占性、不可撤销的版权和专利许可证,您剩下的权利不再是独占的。谷歌将能够从您的贡献中获利,但您也可以。您将减少个人获利的范围,但这从来不是一个“权利”。

英文:

> To what extent does Google own any Go contributions?

You are not required to transfer copyright to Google. You still OWN the copyright.

You are not required to transfer ownership of patents to Google. You still OWN the patents.

In short Google does not OWN any IP that they didn't already own.

But you do grant Google the unlimited right to use and distribute your contributions, and you grant the right to use to downstream folks. Clause 2 covers copyrights, and clause 3 covers patent rights. Moreover you grant this as an irrevocable license (i.e. you cannot change your mind) and for free.

> Do they have full rights to profit
> from these contributions?

There is no such a thing as "a right to profit" in a legal or moral sense. Hence "full rights to profit" is not a valid characterization of the rights that you currently have.

By granting Google non-exclusive, non-revocable copyright and patent licenses, your remaining rights are no longer exclusive. Google will be able to profit your contributions, but so will you. You will have reduced your scope for personal profit, but that was not ever a "right".

答案2

得分: 2

不,这只是意味着如果你为Google的项目做出贡献,Google仍然可以对其进行任何操作。

当然,你是版权持有人。如果你的代码被包含在Go中,你将成为“Go作者”的一部分。

英文:

No, it just means that if you contribute to Google's project, Google can still do whatever they want with it.

You are the copyright holder, of course. If your code gets included into Go, you become part of The Go Authors.

答案3

得分: 1

这是现在的常见做法。

通过贡献者协议,您与谷歌共享版权。

这意味着最终谷歌对整个代码库拥有版权。这使得他们有权根据需要重新许可代码库。(版权所有者决定许可证)。

贡献者协议的主要目标是确保和声明贡献者拥有他们授予项目的权利(专利、版权等)。

例如,有些项目可能希望获得专利授权,但对版权不感兴趣,因为他们没有重新许可项目的意图。

需要注意的是,由于许可证是BSD,版权授权实际上只是一种形式上的手续,因为BSD许可证本身非常自由。

英文:

This is a common practice nowadays.

Effectively, through the Contributors Agreement you are sharing copyright with Google.

That means, in the end, Google has copyright over the entire codebase. This gives them the right to relicense the codebase however they want should they see fit. (Copyright owner determines license).

The primary goal of the CA is to ensure and assert that the contributor has the rights they are granting to the project (patents, copyright, etc.).

Some projects, for example, would want a patent grant, but are not interested in any copyright, as they have no intention of relicensing the project.

Mind, since the license is BSD, a copyright grant is really just a formality, because of how liberal the BSD license is in the first place.

答案4

得分: 0

免责声明:我不是律师。

> 专利许可授权。

意味着如果您在您的贡献中拥有专利,您允许谷歌在不担心知识产权问题的情况下使用它。

换句话说:

专利许可 = 使用“专利技术”的许可(如果有的话)。

这是不可撤销的:意味着您以后不能改变主意。

英文:

Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer

> Grant of Patent License.

Means if you have a patent on something in your contribution, you allow Google to use it without worrying about IP crap.

In other words:

Patent License = Permission to use the "patented technology" (if any).

It's irrecoverable: meaning you can't change your mind later.

huangapple
  • 本文由 发表于 2009年11月13日 07:26:10
  • 转载请务必保留本文链接:https://go.coder-hub.com/1726130.html
匿名

发表评论

匿名网友

:?: :razz: :sad: :evil: :!: :smile: :oops: :grin: :eek: :shock: :???: :cool: :lol: :mad: :twisted: :roll: :wink: :idea: :arrow: :neutral: :cry: :mrgreen:

确定