[libre-riscv-dev] [Bug 179] openpower eula is out, needs review

[bugzilla-daemon at libre-riscv.org]

http://bugs.libre-riscv.org/show_bug.cgi?id=179

--- Comment #14 from Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton <lkcl at lkcl.net> ---
Re: OpenPower EULA Released
J
Jason Self
to lkcl
8 minutes agoDetails
On Mon, 17 Feb 2020 22:42:05 +0000
Crowd Supply <no-reply at crowdsupply.com> wrote:

> An update from the Libre RISC-V M-Class team.
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> # OpenPower EULA Released, FOSDEM, and More
>
> Several things in this update: the OpenPower Foundation released
> their EULA (which is really exciting); we had  a last-minute decision
> to go to FOSDEM to meet NLNet (and meet lots of nice people including
> someone from the EU Commission); we have new team members helping out
> (and making really good progress).
>
> Read the full update here:
> https://www.crowdsupply.com/libre-risc-v/m-class/updates/openpower-eula-released-fosdem-and-more

I don't have an account on bugs.libre-riscv.org, don't want to make
one, and there seems to be no way to submit feedback without making one
so I am making this up.

The Power ISA EULA is non-free. This is a non-exhaustive list of
reasons.

> 1. Grant of Rights
> Solely for the purposes of developing and expanding the Power ISA and
> the POWER ecosystem...

To qualify as free it the grant of rights must be for any purpose,
including those that to not develop or expand the Power ISA or POWER
ecosystem.

> 1.1 OPF grants to Recipient a nonexclusive, worldwide, perpetual,
> royalty-free, non-transferable license under all copyrights licensable
> by OPF and contained in the Power ISA to a) develop technology
> products compatible with the Power ISA, and b) create, use,
> reproduce, perform, display, and distribute Power ISA Cores.

> 1.4 Notwithstanding Sections 1.1 through 1.3 above, Recipient shall
> not have the right or license to create, use, reproduce, perform,
> display, distribute, sell, or license the Power ISA Core in a
> physically implemented chip (including a microprocessor, system on a
> chip, or a field-programmable gate array (FPGA)) that is not Power
> Compliant, nor to license others to do so.

To qualify as free, you should be able to develop technology products
that are incompatible with the Power ISA and to distribute them. In
such a case, it would be acceptable for the EULA to require
to change the name of it so that people don't think it is POWER, and/or
to identify the modifications as yours, but they must be permitted.

> 2.1 Recipient shall have the right to submit Contributions to the
> Power ISA through a prospectively authorized process by OPF, but
> shall not implement such Contributions until fully approved through
> the prospectively authorized OPF process.

To qualify as free you should also have the freedom to make such
modifications to the ISA and to share them if desired. If they are
shared, you should not be required to notify anyone in particular, or
in any particular way.

Just as with the last piece, it would be acceptable for the EULA to
require to change the name of it so that people don't think it is
POWER, and/or to identify the modifications as yours, but they must be
permitted.
noname
J
Jason Self
to lkcl
5 minutes agoDetails
Also, this could have been a problem:

> The products described in the Power ISA are NOT intended for use in
> applications such as implantation, life support, or other hazardous
> uses where malfunction could result in death, bodily injury, or
> catastrophic property damage.

If this were that it's not allowed to be used in those use cases, then
that would be another reason for it to be non-free but I'm taking "not
intended" to mean that it's not an absolute prohibition on those use
cases and that they still can be.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.