Editing Software patent (section)

===Open source software===
{{Main|Software patents and free software}}
There is [[Software patent debate|strong dislike]] in the [[free software community]] towards software patents. Much of this has been caused by [[free software]] or [[Open-source software|open source]] projects terminating<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.gnu.org/patent-examp/patent-examples.html|title=Software patents that hurt free software|publisher=Free Software Foundation|access-date=2012-10-09}}</ref> when the owners of patents covering aspects of a project demanded license fees that the project could not pay, or was not willing to pay, or offered licenses with terms that the project was unwilling to accept, or could not accept, because it conflicted with the [[free software license]] in use.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://swpat.ffii.org/patents/effects|title=Effects|series=Patentability and Democracy in Europe|publisher=Foundation for a Free Information Infrastructure|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070210164646/http://swpat.ffii.org/patents/effects/|archive-date=February 10, 2007}}</ref>

Several patent holders have offered royalty-free patent licenses for a very small portion of their patent portfolios. Such actions have provoked only minor reaction from the [[free software community|free]] and [[open source community|open source]] software communities for reasons such as fear of the patent holder changing their mind or the license terms being so narrow as to have little use.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.softwarefreedom.org/resources/2008/osp-gpl.html|title=Microsoft's Open Specification Promise: No Assurance for GPL|publisher=[[Software Freedom Law Center]]}}</ref> Companies that have done this include [[Apple Inc.|Apple]],<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://opensource.apple.com/apsl/|title=License - APSL|website=opensource.apple.com}}</ref> [[IBM]],<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.unicode.org/notes/tn6/#Intellectual_Property|title=UTN #6: BOCU-1|date=2006-02-04|first1=Markus |last1=Scherer |author2-link=Mark Davis (Unicode)|first2=Mark |last2=Davis|access-date=2014-02-05}}</ref> [[Microsoft]],<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.microsoft.com/resources/sharedsource/silverlightcontrolslicense.mspx|title=Silverlight Controls License|publisher=Microsoft Corporation}}</ref> [[Nokia]],<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://sourceforge.net/projects/symbiandump/|title=symbian-dump|website=SourceForge|date=11 April 2013 }}</ref> [[Novell]],<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.novell.com/company/policies/patent/|title=Patent Policy|publisher=Novell|access-date=2012-10-09|archive-date=2013-07-30|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130730235511/http://www.novell.com/company/policies/patent/|url-status=dead}}</ref> [[Red Hat]],<ref name=autogenerated1>{{cite web|url=http://www.redhat.com/legal/patent_policy.html|publisher=Red Hat|title=Red Hat Patent Policy}}</ref> and [[Sun Microsystems|Sun]] (now [[Oracle Corporation|Oracle]]).<ref>{{cite web|url=http://java.sun.com/javase/6/jdk-6u2-license.txt|title=Oracle Technology Network for Java Developers|publisher=Sun Microsystems|access-date=2012-10-09}}</ref>

In 2005, Sun Microsystems announced that they were making a portfolio of 1,600 patents available through a patent license called [[Common Development and Distribution License]].<ref>{{cite press release|url=http://www.sun.com/smi/Press/sunflash/2005-01/sunflash.20050125.2.xml|title=Sun Grants Global Open Source Community Access to More than 1,600 Patents|publisher=Sun Microsystems|date=January 25, 2005|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20081202014850/http://www.sun.com/smi/Press/sunflash/2005-01/sunflash.20050125.2.xml|archive-date=December 2, 2008}}</ref>

In 2006, Microsoft's [[Microsoft–Novell agreement|pledge not to sue]] Novell [[Linux]] customers, [[openSUSE]] contributors, and free/open source software developers over patents<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.microsoft.com/interop/msnovellcollab/community.mspx|title=Community Commitments – Microsoft & Novell Interoperability Collaboration|publisher=Microsoft|date=November 2, 2006}}</ref> and the associated collaboration agreement with Novell<ref>{{cite press release|url=http://www.novell.com/news/press/item.jsp?id=1196|title=Microsoft and Novell Announce Broad Collaboration on Windows and Linux Interoperability and Support|date=November 2, 2006|publisher=Novell}}</ref> was met with disdain from the [[Software Freedom Law Center]]<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.businessreviewonline.com/os/archives/2006/11/microsofts_deve.html|title=Microsoft's developer patent pledge 'worse than useless' says SFLC|date=November 10, 2006}}</ref> while commentators from the Free Software Foundation stated that the agreement would not comply with [[GPLv3]]. Meanwhile, Microsoft has reached similar agreements with [[Dell]] and [[Samsung]],<ref>{{cite web|author1=Eric Lai|author2=Sumner Lemon|url=http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9019238/Update_Microsoft_wants_royalties_for_open_source_software|title=Update: Microsoft wants royalties for open-source software|publisher=Computerworld|date=2007-05-13|access-date=2012-10-09}}</ref> due to alleged patent infringements of the Linux operating system. Microsoft has also derived revenue from Android by making such agreements-not-to-sue with Android vendors.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.microsoft.com/Presspass/press/2012/jan12/01-12LGPR.mspx|title=Microsoft and LG Sign Patent Agreement Covering Android and Chrome OS Based Devices|publisher=Microsoft|date=2012-01-12|access-date=2012-10-09}}</ref>