Subject: Re: openssl license change
To: Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino <itojun@iijlab.net>
From: Robert Elz <kre@munnari.OZ.AU>
List: tech-security
Date: 09/24/2002 17:24:49
    Date:        Tue, 24 Sep 2002 17:53:26 +0900
    From:        Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino <itojun@iijlab.net>
    Message-ID:  <20020924085327.61A9C7B9@starfruit.itojun.org>

  | 	it looks that openssl will have the following copyright boilerplate
  | 	for the import of elliptic curve code.  therefore it won't meet our
  | 	"basesrc" requirement, and i guess it won't even fit into "gnusrc".
  | 	what shall we do about it?  no updates for openssl portion?

No, assuming that the "OpenSSL open source license provided above" is
OK (I'm assuming it is without actually checking), then nothing in the
rest of what's there will bother anyone.

All it is saying is that if you don't sue sun for any patents that
you own, they won't sue you for contravening their patents (which I
assume they have on the code they've contributed).   Since I don't
think TNF owns any patents, it can easily covenant not to sue sun
for infringing upon any of them...

It might be worth making a note of this somewhere, so some other vendor
who wants to use NetBSD, and who owns patents in this area, and who plans
on suing Sun for violating them, can decide either not to use this new
code at all, or in doing so, not get the covenant from sun that they won't
be sued in turn.

This kind of statement is about the best it is possible to get out of
any patented code.

kre