Clarification of License Terms - Asterisk

[Shawn Robinson]

On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 20:30, Nathan Sullivan <nathan at nightsys.net> wrote:

> Hey Guys,
>
> Was just reading some stuff out of pure chance, and saw something that
> sounds borderline contradictory, someone mind giving a second opinion? See
> below:
>
> http://www.asterisk.org/developers/bug-guidelines
>
> The reason for the contributor license agreement has been discussed many
> times, but the general gist is that your contribution must not introduce any
> encumbrance to the Asterisk code base, but Digium DOES NOT OWN your
> contribution, *and they cannot take released Asterisk out of GPL.* Relax;
> it's a very fair and reasonable license, and does not remove your rights or
> threaten the open source nature of the project. See the mailing list
> archives for long explanations of why everyone who contributes agrees that
> it's a fair and sane thing to do. You only need to sign the contributor
> license agreement once; it applies to all stuff that you send in via the
> issue tracker.
>
> https://issues.asterisk.org/view_license_agreement.php
>
> You hereby grant Digium a perpetual, worldwide, royalty-free, irrevocable,
> non-exclusive, and transferable license to use, reproduce, prepare
> derivative works of, publicly display, publicly perform, distribute the
> Submissions, and to sublicense such rights to others. The rights granted may
> be exercised in any form or format, and Digium may distribute and sublicense
> to others on any licensing terms, including without limitation: (a) open
> source licenses like the GNU General Public License (GPL), or the Berkeley
> Science Division license (BSD); or (b) binary, proprietary, or commercial
> licenses. *If Your Submission is derived from software released by Digium
> under the GPL, Digium as licensor thereof waives such requirements of the
> GPL as applied to that software to the limited extent necessary to allow you
> to provide the Submission and the foregoing license to Digium.*
> *
> *
> Regards,
>
> Nathan.
>

This section of that second license is just as bad if not worse imho.

You hereby grant Digium a perpetual, worldwide, royalty-free, irrevocable,
non-exclusive, sublicenseable and transferable license under any patent You
own or control, now or in the future, to make, have made, use, sell, offer
for sale, or import Submissions or any modifications thereof, including
without limitation any combinations of the Submissions or modifications
thereof with software, technology or services of Digium or its affiliates.

Why should i have to grant them a license to my better mouse trap patent if
i'm offering a patch to them?
-- 
Life has been proven to have a 100% mortality rate.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.gpl-violations.org/pipermail/legal/attachments/20100114/bd851f33/attachment.htm>